The appellant was convicted of the forgery of an invoice showing that a quantity of petrol had been delivered and indicating perhaps that it had been supplied for use in a particular motor vehicle, which may not have been true. The State made no attempt to support the conviction, but the question arose whether on the facts a conviction of obtaining by false pretences should be substituted.
Held:
(i) A document which is what it purports to be does not become 10 a forgery merely because it contains false statements; to be a forgery "the writing must tell a lie about itself".
