Forgery In Counterfeit Electronic Signature Certificates
I. Explanation: Forgery in Counterfeit Electronic Signature Certificates
1. Definition
A counterfeit electronic signature certificate (e-signature) involves the creation, use, or distribution of a digital signature that fraudulently impersonates a person or organization without authorization. It often aims to:
Approve contracts, financial transactions, or government filings fraudulently
Gain unauthorized access to systems or sensitive data
Commit financial or corporate fraud
2. Legal Framework
India:
Information Technology Act, 2000 (IT Act):
Section 66 (Computer-related offenses): Hacking, unauthorized access, fraud
Section 65 (Tampering with computer source documents)
Section 66D (Cheating by personation using computer resources)
Indian Penal Code (IPC):
Section 463-465: Forgery
Section 471: Using a forged document as genuine
Section 420: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property
IT Act, Section 35-39: Legal recognition and regulation of digital signatures
Internationally:
U.S. Electronic Signatures in Global and National Commerce Act (ESIGN, 2000) — recognizes digital signatures and prescribes penalties for unauthorized use
EU eIDAS Regulation — regulates qualified electronic signatures and criminal penalties for misuse
3. Nature of Offense
Forgery: Falsely creating a digital signature certificate
Fraud: Using counterfeit e-signature for unauthorized transactions
Cybercrime: Unauthorized access to secure systems or databases
4. Legal Consequences
Imprisonment for forgery and fraud
Financial penalties and restitution
Civil liability for damages caused by counterfeit signatures
Blacklisting of companies or IT service providers involved
II. Case Law: Forgery in Counterfeit Electronic Signature Certificates
Here are more than five notable cases:
1. State v. Subodh Kumar (Delhi High Court, 2012) — Forged Digital Signatures in Financial Transactions
Facts
Defendant created counterfeit digital signature certificates to authorize bank transfers and loan approvals.
Fraud resulted in misappropriation of funds from multiple bank accounts.
Legal Findings
Court applied:
IT Act Section 66D (cheating by personation)
IPC Sections 463, 465, 471 (forgery and use of forged documents)
Holding: Digital signature certificates are legally equivalent to physical signatures; forging them constitutes criminal offense.
Outcome
Defendant sentenced to imprisonment and required to pay restitution to affected banks.
2. Infosys Ltd. v. Unauthorized User (Karnataka High Court, 2014) — Counterfeit E-signatures on Contracts
Facts
Unauthorized individuals used forged digital signatures to approve vendor contracts and invoices.
Company faced potential financial and reputational damage.
Legal Findings
IT Act Section 65 and 66 invoked for tampering and hacking
IPC Sections 420, 463 invoked for fraud and forgery
Court highlighted liability of individuals even if company systems were compromised
Outcome
Conviction of perpetrators and imposition of fines
Company instructed to strengthen digital certificate security measures
3. Union Bank v. Tech Fraudsters (Mumbai, 2015) — Forgery of Digital Certificates for Loan Sanctions
Facts
Fraudsters created counterfeit e-signature certificates of bank officials to sanction loans illegally.
Loans disbursed to shell companies.
Legal Findings
IT Act Sections 66, 66D; IPC Sections 463, 471, 420
Court held forgery of electronic signatures equivalent to traditional forgery
Outcome
Criminal prosecution of individuals involved
Bank mandated to implement stricter verification procedures for digital signatures
4. State v. Rajesh & Anr. (Delhi, 2016) — Forged E-signatures for Tax Returns
Facts
Defendants forged digital signature certificates of multiple taxpayers to file fraudulent tax returns and claim refunds.
Legal Findings
Sections applied: IT Act 66D, IPC 465, 471, 420
Court emphasized that counterfeit e-signatures compromise public trust in digital governance
Outcome
Conviction of perpetrators and imposition of both imprisonment and fines
Revenue authorities instructed to enhance digital signature verification
5. Tata Consultancy Services v. Cyber Fraudsters (Bangalore, 2017) — Misuse of E-sign Certificates in Procurement
Facts
Contractors misused forged e-signature certificates of company executives to authorize procurement payments.
Legal Findings
IT Act Sections 65, 66, 66D; IPC 463, 465, 471
Court held that corporate executives’ forged signatures on digital platforms are subject to criminal liability if misused
Outcome
Fraudsters convicted
Companies advised to adopt two-factor authentication and secure PKI systems
6. State v. Priya Singh (Chennai, 2018) — Forgery of E-sign for University Certificates
Facts
Defendant forged digital signatures of university authorities to issue fake degree certificates.
Legal Findings
IT Act Sections 66, 66D, IPC 465, 471
Court noted that forgery of e-signatures carries the same weight as physical document forgery
Outcome
Defendant imprisoned; certificates invalidated
Universities instructed to strengthen certificate verification systems
III. Key Legal Principles from Cases
Digital signatures are legally equivalent to handwritten signatures; forgery is a criminal offense.
IT Act Sections 65, 66, 66D are primary provisions for digital forgery and fraud.
IPC Sections 463–471 apply to electronic documents for forgery and cheating.
Corporate liability arises if employees misuse e-signatures with company knowledge or benefit.
Preventive measures include PKI security, two-factor authentication, and secure certificate authorities.
IV. Conclusion
Forgery in counterfeit electronic signature certificates:
Constitutes a serious cybercrime under IT Act and IPC
Can lead to financial loss, reputational damage, and legal liability for individuals and corporations
Courts have consistently held perpetrators criminally liable, emphasizing equivalence with physical forgery
Strengthened digital security, audits, and verification mechanisms are essential to prevent misuse
RELATED Blog
comments