DILAVARHUSSAIN MUSA PATEL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 14-9-2001 delivered by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Bharuch, confirming the judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 15-6-1995 recorded by the learned 3rd Jt. J. M. F. C. , Bharuch, in Criminal Case No. 9478 of 1992 sentencing him to suffer 6 months SI and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/-, in default, to suffer further two months SI for each offence under Secs. 465 and 471 of IPC, one month SI and to pay fine of Rs. 500/-, in default, to suffer further one month SI for the offence under Sec. 177 of IPC and one year and to pay fine of Rs. 1,500/-, in default, to suffer further three months SI for the offence under Sec. 198 of IPC. All the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution in short is that the applicant-accused had applied for getting a passport to the Regional Passport Officer, Ahmedabad. When the said application was sent to Nabipur Police Station for verification, it was found that the actual birth date of the applicant in the School Leaving Certificate was corrected from 28-7-1966 to 28-7-1969 thereby changing the year of birth. Hence, a complaint was lodged by PSI, Nabipur Police Station, against the applicant-accused for the offence punishable under Sections 173, 198, 465 and 471 of the IP Code alleging inter alia that the applicant-accused, in order to get passport illegally, forged School Leaving Certificate, concealed true facts and gave false statements and particulars to passport authority. The said complaint was registered as Crime Register No. I-151 of 1991 at the said Police Station and police started investigation. At the end of investigation, charge sheet came to be filed against the accused in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch, and it was transferred to the Court of learned J. M. F. C. , Bharuch, for disposal on merits where it was numbered as Criminal Case No. 9478 of 1992.

(3.) ON production of the accused, learned Magistrate framed charge against the accused. The accused denied the said charge and prayed for trial. To prove the guilt against the accused, prosecution examined 7 witnesses and produced and relied upon various documentary evidence. On submission of closing pursis by the prosecution, learned Magistrate, recorded further statement of the accused under Sec. 313 of Code of Criminal Procedure qua incriminating evidence.