Insurer Denying Issuance Of Motor Accident Policy Not Automatic Proof Of Forgery: Gujarat High Court

KanoonHQ Legal Gazette · AI-generated brief from the source linked below. How briefs are made

Published 26 October 2026

Bottom Line Up Front (BLUF)

The Gujarat High Court, in a decision by Justice J.C. Doshi, held that an insurer's denial of issuing a motor accident policy does not automatically prove forgery. The court emphasized that such a denial only indicates the policy was not issued by the insurer, not that it was forged, and further investigation is required.

Ratio Decidendi · Legal Principle Established

An insurer's statement denying the issuance of a motor accident policy is not conclusive proof of forgery under the Indian Penal Code, 1860. Such a denial merely confirms the non-issuance by the insurer and necessitates further investigation to establish the act of forgery.

Practice & Procedural Impact for Advocates

Advocates should note that a mere denial of policy issuance by an insurer is insufficient to establish forgery; additional evidence is required. Litigants facing such denials should be prepared to present further proof to substantiate claims of forgery, rather than relying solely on the insurer's statement.

Key Legal Takeaways

1Insurer's denial of policy issuance is not automatic proof of forgery.
2Further investigation is required to establish forgery.
3Mere non-issuance does not equate to a forged document.

The Legal Issue The core legal issue addressed by the Gujarat High Court was whether a statement from an insurance company denying the issuance of a motor accident policy could, by itself, be considered conclusive proof of forgery. This question often arises in cases where claims are made based on allegedly forged insurance documents, and the prosecution relies solely on the insurer's denial to establish the offence of forgery.

Court's Reasoning Justice J.C. Doshi of the Gujarat High Court clarified that an insurer's denial of having issued a particular motor accident policy only confirms that the policy did not originate from their office. It does not, however, automatically establish that the document in question is a forged one. The court reasoned that for an act to constitute forgery under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, there must be evidence demonstrating that the document was created with the intent to deceive or defraud, and that it was falsely made. A simple denial of issuance by the insurance company, while relevant, is not sufficient on its own to prove these elements of forgery. Further investigation and evidence are necessary to establish the actual act of forging the document.

What Follows This ruling implies that in cases involving alleged forgery of motor accident policies, the prosecution cannot solely rely on a letter or statement from the insurance company denying issuance. Investigating agencies and courts will need to seek additional evidence to prove the act of forgery, such as forensic analysis of the document, identification of the person who created the false document, and evidence of intent to defraud. The burden remains on the prosecution to prove all elements of forgery beyond reasonable doubt, and the insurer's denial is merely one piece of evidence, not the entire case.