G A DEPARTMENT Vs. NARESH CHANDRA SAHOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent Naresh Chandra Sahoo faced trial in the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Cuttack in Vigilance G.R. Case No.16 of 1993 for offences punishable under sections 471 read with section 465 of the Indian Penal Code on the accusation that on 30.08.1991 he fraudulently produced/used a forged marksheet as genuine before the Managing Committee of Anchalika Mahavidyalaya, Kanpur, Narsinghpur (hereafter 'the College') showing to have secured total marks 433 in Oriya M.A. Examination held in July 1980 although he had actually secured total marks 401 in Oriya examination held in July 1979 as per the tabulation register of the University which he knew at the time of using it to be a forged document and thereby got himself selected and appointed for the post of lecturer in Oriya in the aforesaid College in U.G.C. scale of pay. He was further charged under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code on the accusation that he cheated the Managing Committee of the College inducing them to get himself appointed and deliver pay in U.G.C. scale which was the property of the said institution and converted the same to his own use. The learned trial Court vide impugned judgment and order dated 18.12.2004 has been pleased to hold that the prosecution has failed to prove its case against the respondent and accordingly acquitted him of all the charges.

(2.) The prosecution case, as per the first information report lodged by Sri Sarbeswar Kar (P.W.5), Dy. Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Cuttack Division, Cuttack on 30.03.1993 before the Superintendent of Police, Vigilance, Cuttack Division, Cuttack is that he received reliable information that the respondent had got himself selected and appointed as lecturer in Oriya of the College by using forged documents as genuine and accordingly he took up enquiry. During enquiry, it was ascertained that the respondent appeared as a private candidate in M.A. Oriya Part-I Examination in July 1979 having Roll No.219183 and he secured 212 marks in the four papers out of total marks of 400. In Paper-I, he scored 48 marks, in Paper-II 54 marks, in Paper-III 58 marks and in Paper IV 52 marks. The respondent also appeared in Part-II of the M.A. Oriya examination having Roll No.219630 and he secured 189 marks out of total 400 marks. In Paper-V, he scored 51 marks, in Paper-VI 59 marks, in Paper- VII 39 marks and in Paper-VIII 40 marks and therefore, the total marks which he had secured in M.A. Oriya examination was 212+189=401 marks out of total 800 marks which was just 50 percent. The enquiry further revealed that with a view to get himself appointed as a lecturer in Oriya, the respondent managed to procure a forged mark sheet showing it to have been issued from Utkal University which has held in month of July 1980 and as per the said mark sheet, he had secured total marks of 433 out of 800 marks and in Paper-VII, it is shown in the mark sheet that the respondent had secured 59 marks and in Paper-VIII he had secured 52 marks and therefore, he has enhanced the marks in Paper-VII from 39 to 59 i.e. 20 marks and in Paper-VIII from 40 to 52 i.e. 12 marks and in total 32 marks in aggregate, making a total of 433 marks i.e. about 54 percent of the total marks of 800. It was further revealed during inquiry that the respondent knowing fully well that the marksheet is a forged one, he utilized the same for being selected and appointed as lecturer from 30.03.1981 and got U.G.C. scale of pay.

(3.) The defence plea of the respondent who examined himself as D.W.1 is one of false implication and it is his case that he obtained the mark sheet after passing the M.A. Part-II examination in the year 1980 making an application in the issue counter of Utkal University. It is his case that he has secured 221 marks in the Part-II examination and not 189 marks as per Ext.17. It is further pleaded that since the tabulation register of the issue section has not been seized, his genuine marks could not come out.