REPUBLIC OF INDIA Vs. BASANTA KUMAR SAHU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the order passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, discharging the opposite party of offences under Sections 120-B, 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code in S.P.E. Case No 6 of 1987.

(2.) Prosecution case in brief is that the opposite party was serving as Pharmacist in the Reserve Bank of India, Bhubaneswar. In the year 1980 some posts of Typists fell vacant in the aforesaid Bank. For filling up the vacancies an advertisement was issued in local newspaper inviting applications from candidates. One of the eligibility conditions, according to the requirement in office advertisement was , was that the candidates should be under-graduates with minimum 45!o marks in English either in the High School Examination or in the Intermediate Examination. The proforma opposite party was the daughter of the opposite party. She had passed the Intermediate Examination and offered her candidature for one of the posts of Typists by making an application and enclosing various certificates one of which was an attested copy of mark-sheet in the Intermediate Examination. It was mentioned in the said attested copy that she had secured 115 marks in English in the Intermediate Examination and the total marks were 385. On the basis of attested copy of the mark-sheet she was found eligible and after typing test and interview she was selected for appointment to one of the posts which she joined. Subsequently it came to light that she had submitted a false attested copy of the mark-sheet in which the total marks in English and the grand total marks had been inflated by committing forgery. Specific allegations against the opposite party as stated in the charge-sheet are as follows: Further during the investigation it was established that the application has been filled up by the father of the accused Sri Basanta Kumar Sahu in his own hand wherein he submitted false total marks of the accused in her l.A. examination as 385 and the accused put her signature therein. The official witnesses identified the handwriting of Smt. Minakhi Sahu and Sri Basanta Kumar Sahu in all the questioned documents. Further the attested true copy of the l.A. Mark sheet and other attested certificates of the accused submitted by her along with the application was established to have contained false attestations. Besides the C.E.C.D. also opines that the handwriting in the application of Smt. Minakhi Sahu, is that of Sri Basanta Kumar Sahu (A.2) and the signature appended thereto is that of Smt. Minakhi Sahu (A.1). It is further opined that the handwriting in the staff application and the signature available in the counterfoil mark sheet are by the hand of Smt. Minakhi Sahu (A.1). The case against the opposite party and the proforma opposite party was investigated by the Special Police Establishment and charge-sheet was submitted against them for having committed offences under Sections 120-B. 420, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) The learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate heard the learned Counsel appearing for both parties at the time of framing of charges and by the impugned order, which assumed the character of a judgment as if there had been a full-fledged trial and by making reference to a few decisions as to what is criminal conspiracy and how it is to be proved by direct as well as circumstantial evidence, he found absence of prima facie case against the opposite party and discharged him. Be it mentioned that in the impugned order he repeatedly made reference to the statements under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Code for short) as evidence although such statements are not evidence in a criminal Proceeding nor any evidence had been adduced by the prosecution at that stage of the case.