TEJ SINGH Vs. STATE DELHI ADMINISTRATION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Even though this case is on my board for a long time, the counsel for the parties have not put in any appearance. I, therefore, proceed to decide this revision petition on merits.

(2.) The petitioner was convicted by the Court of the Metropolitan Magistrate under section 417, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year on each count and also a fine of Rs. 500.00 , indefault of payment of fine one month's rigorous imprisonment. The Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated 6th of June 1983 set aside the conviction under section 468 Indian Penal Code . (Sic) and maintained the conviction under sections 4fa8 and 471' of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The petitioner was charged with the aforesaid offences on the ground that on his appointment as a Peon in the Badarpur Thermal Power Project he submitted a forged middle pass certificate from the A.H. Janta Inter College, Dadri, Bulandshahr, and on verification from the Principal it was found that the certificate was forged one. The charge goes to say that it was on the basis of the forged certificate that he procured this employment. The prosecution in support of its case examined ShriT.C. Gupta (P.W. 1), the Administrative Officer who, in fact, made the complaint in this regard on 11th January 1977 on the basis of which a case was registered on 16th January 1977. Public Witness . 3 Shri Har Sharan Singh Sharma, Principal of the aforesaid College has proved that the certificate does not represent the signatures of Shri Shoba Ram Sharma, the then Principal, who has since died. To the same effect is the testimony of Public Witness . 5 Shri Sri Ram Sharma, Principal of the aforesaid college. There is no evidence to the effect that this certificate was, in fact, produced along with the form for seeking service by the petitioners or that he intentionally and knowingly used it despite his knowledge that it was a forged document. Both the Courts have believed this evidence and I do not find anything wrong in the appreciation of the evidence excepting the fact that the learned Additional Sessions Judge also seemed to have erred in coming to the conclusion that the petitioner used this document knowing it to be forged and that it was so wilfully done. The fact, however, remains that on the basis of the certificate regarding qualification, which the petitioner possessed, he did seek employment which he got in the year 1973. The Court is not taken into confidence by Public Witness .I Shri T.C. Gupta as to how this fact came to his notice only in 1977. In any case, on the basis of the evidence and the circumstances surrounding this case I am of the view that the petitioner is guilty of cheating punishable under section 417 of the Indian Penal Code. I accordingly hold him guilty under section 417 of the Indian Penal Code. The conviction of the petitioner under section 471 Indian Penal Code recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge is set aside.