STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PUNDLIK PANDURANG BIRADAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Challenge in this appeal is to judgment rendered by learned Judicial Magistrate (F.C.), Udgir, in a Criminal Case bearing (RCC No. 16/1989), whereby the Respondents have been acquitted of the charge for offences punishable Under Sections 420, 467 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.

(2.) The background facts leading to the prosecution may be stated in the following way:

(3.) At the trial, the prosecution examined in all six (6) witnesses in support of its case. The learned Judicial Magistrate, held that the evidence produced on record was insufficient to infer forgery of the sale-deed in question and particularly by the Respondent Nos. 1 to 4 in furtherance of their common intention. The learned Judicial Magistrate held that the opinion of the handwriting expert was not reliable in order to positively hold that the Respondent No. 4 - Maroti signed the sale deed in question and thereby impersonated the complainant-P.W. Shrmant Biradar. The learned Magistrate, held that opinion of the handwriting viz; P.W. Mr.Jadhav, could not be regarded as conclusive proof of the forgery in question. He noticed that P.W.4 Babu, who acted as panch witness of panchanama (Exh. 92), was unable to locate the nature of recitals thereof. The learned Judicial Magistrate extended benefit of doubt to the Respondents and acquitted them.