STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. KHANT CHANA RAGHAV

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE State of Gujarat preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 16.4.1994 delivered by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Veraval, whereby the present respondent who was the accused in Criminal Case No.1470 of 1986, came to be acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT is the case of the prosceution that the accused was serving as a Bit -Guard in the Forest Department. However, he had procured his service as such by tendering fake School Leaving Certificate, and thereby the accused has committed the offences punishable under Section 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. On behalf of the State of Gujarat, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, Mr.M.R. Mengde strenously urged that the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Veraval had committed serious illegalities in acquitting the accused. That the learned Magistrate erred in holding that the application given by witness Bhana Laxman to the D.S.P., Junagadh should have been treated as First Information Report, in connection with the commission of cognisable offence. That the learned Magistrate erred in coming to the conclusion that the prosecution failed to prove that the fake School Leaving Certificate was tendered by the accused to his Department at the time of getting job. That it was the accused who was in need of job, and at the time of getting job, it is impossible to believe that somebody else on behalf of the accused might have tendered fake Certificate to the Forest Department. That the prosceution had adduced cogent and convincing evidence by examining the teacher of the School, wherein the accused is said to have studied as per the fake certificate; and Talati cum Secretary of the Village Panchayat along with the record regarding registration of birth, and it has come in evidence that the accused neither studied in the School from where he has said to have obtained the School Leaving Certificate nor he was born in Village Virdi on 01.06.1960, which is said to be the date of birth of the accused. That considering the deposition of witness Harsukhlal Kanjibhai, examined at Exh.8, who was Talati cum Secretary of Village Virdi, categorically deposed that in the month of June 1960, no birth of the accused was registered in his Panchayat. That even the witness Devabhai Karsanbhai Mori, whose testimony is recorded at Exh.6, clearly deposed that in the Primany School of Village Virdi, the accused had never studied. Therefore, in sum and substance it is submitted that the prosecution succeeded in proving the case beyond reasonable doubt against the accused, and the impugned judgment and order passed by the Trial Court deserves to be set -aside, and the respondent accused should be appropriately punished.

(3.) AS against this, on behalf of the respondent accused, the learned Advocate Mr.Hriday Buch, supporting the impugned judgment and order passed by the Trial Court, submitted that the Trial Court rightly came to the conclusion that the prosceution failed to prove beyond any reasonable doubt the offences charged against the accused. That even the prosecution failed to examine as witness, the complainant, who lodged the so -called FIR before police against the accused, which is even not proved on record in the criminal case. That the so -called fake certificate was fabricated by the accused and was tendered by the accused to his Department is not proved on record, during the course of the trial before the learned Magistrate. That as a matter of fact, considering the testimony of witness Bhana Laxman, who is examined at Exh.15, it is revealed that this witness had made some complaint in writing to D.S.P., Junagadh, making false allegations against the accused that he obtained the job as Bit -Guard in the Forest Department by exercising deceiptful means. However, witness Bhana Laxman clealy deposed that he is illiterate. He was even not read over the so -called application. That the so -called application said to have been made by witness Bhana Laxman to the D.S.P., Junagadh is not produced on record in this case. Therefore, the learned Magistrate rightly observed in his judgment that the prosecution has suppressed the material evidence in this case. In the result, it is submitted that the appeal preferred by the State of Gujarat be dismissed.