KRIPA RAM Vs. STATE OF CHHATTISGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Facts leading to the disposal of this revision petition in brief are that the accused/applicant had manipulated the mark-sheet of one Bisru Ram and by erasing his name he had overwritten his own name. Not only this, he also forged the appointment order under the false seal and signature of the Collector and thus obtained the appointment as teacher on the pretext of being a handicapped person. On a matter being reported to the Police, offences under Sections 380, 170, 420 and 465 IPC were registered against the accused/applicant and after completion of investigation Challan was filed under those sections followed by framing of charge accordingly.

(2.) On the basis of material on record learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kanker acquitted the accused/applicant of the charges under Sections 380, 170 and 465 IPC but convicted him under Section 420 IPC vide its judgment dated 26.10.1999 and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for one year and pay fine of Rs.200/- plus default stipulation. In appeal, learned lower Appellate Court also affirmed the findings recorded by the Magistrate in toto vide judgment impugned dated 29.01.2005 passed in Criminal Appeal No.169/1999. Hence this revision.

(3.) Counsel for the accused/applicant submits that both the Courts below have not considered the material available on record in its proper perspective and, therefore, the findings so recorded cannot be sustained in the eye of law. He further submits that the prosecution did not produce any material to show that the appointment order was not genuine and it was fabricated by the applicant. He also submits that PW-13 on whose statement the conviction of the accused/applicant is based cannot be said to be an expert regarding giving of any correct opinion about the seal and signature of the higher authority.