SUKHENDU SAU Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Affidavit -of -service filed by the petitioner be kept with the record.

(2.) The petitioner is a superannuated licensed building surveyer of Baidyabati Municipality. The allegation against him is to the effect that he had prepared a building plan which had been submitted for sanction before Baidyabati Municipality in favour of co -accused Sukumar Das. It is further alleged that Sukumar Das utilized a photocopy of the plan allegedly signed by Tarit Kumar Mitra, Sub -Assistant Engineer and ward Councilor namely Pravash Poddar for obtaining water connection to the premises. On enquiry, it was suspected that the said signatures were forged and a criminal case being Srerampur P.S. Case No. 262/14 dated 02.05.2014 under Sections 468/471/472/420/120B/34 Indian Penal Code was registered for investigation. In course of investigation the documents in question were seized and sent for opinion of handwriting expert and it transpired that the questioned documents were not signed by the maker Tarit Kumar Mitra and Pravash Poddar but by Sukumar Das. Pursuant thereto, charge -sheet has been filed against the said Sukumar Das and the petitioner who had prepared the original plan.

(3.) Mr. Mukherjee learned senior counsel appearing for the petitioner submitted that the uncontroverted allegations indicate that the document were allegedly forged and used by co - accused Sukumar Das. He also submitted that the petitioner merely prepared the original plan and there is nothing to connect to the petitioner to the alleged forgery or user of forged document.