In giving false evidence, the wrong-doer of giving false evidence makes the offence after an oath before the Court, whereas, in forgery, there is no necessity to take oath before committing the offence of forgery. 3. Giving false evidence, fabricating false evidence etc., are merely connected with the judicial proceedings. But the offences of forgery, counterfeit etc., are mainly connected with public life. 4. Giving false evidence, fabricating false evidence etc.
may relate to any kind of evidence ie., document, statement etc., where as forgery mainly relates with the documents. 5. The offence of giving false evidence is done openly, that too before the court whereas the offence of forgery is generally done secretly. 6. Giving false evidence expresses general intention, but forgery expresses particular intention.
7. Giving false statement need not be of any material point, but, forgery. 8. There should be a proceeding being conducted in the case of false evidence. But, such a proceeding need not be in existence in the case of forgery.
9. The object of the wrong-doer is to win the case by giving false evidence, but the object of the wrong-doer is to get the property illegally. 10. In the offence of giving false evidence, a person who is legally bound by an oath to state the truth commits the crime but in the offence of forgery there is no oath taking. Forged Document (S. 470): According to Section 470, IPC, and “a false document or electronic record made wholly or in part by forgery is designated as ‘a forged document or electronic record”.