STATE OF MIZORAM Vs. SK NOOR MOHAMMAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) (Oral) - This appeal by the State is directed against the judgment of acquittal dated 2.12.2002 passed by the learned Magistrate First Class, Aizawl in GR Case No. 1588 of 1996 acquitting the accused-respondent from charges under section 468/420/381/471/473 IPC.

(2.) On the basis of the first information report dated 28.11.96 submitted by Shri RK Mehra, PW 1, alleging that an amount of Rs. 5,00,000 was withdrawn by one Shri HS Kumar, as per Bank record, from the Cash Assignment Account of Chief Engineer, Project Pushpak held at State Bank of India, Bawngkawn Branch, on 27.11.96 against cheque No.G.897969 dated 26.11.96 by forging signatures of Cash Assignment Officer Shri CK Prasad, AEE (C) and the informant, Bawngkawn Police Station Case No.498/96 was registered under section 468/42C Penal Code. The Investigating Agency, during the course of investigation recorded the statements of the witnesses and seized a number of documents including the Cheque Book, as well as the cheque with an amount of Rs. 5,00,000 was withdrawn from the Bank, and after obtaining the specimen signature of the accused, as well as of Shri RK Mehra and Shri CK Prasad sent the same to Forensic Science Laboratory for their opinion. During investigation, the statements of the accused-respondent under section 164 Crimial P.C. was also recorded by the learned Magistrate and thereafter, submitted the charge sheet. Accordingly, charges under section 381/468/473/471/420 Penal Code were framed by the learned Magistrate on 21.10.99 against the accused-respondent. The prosecution, in order to bring home the charges against the accused-respondent examined as many as 17 (seventeen) witnesses including the first informant, witnesses of seizure memos, the Bank official, the Magistrate who recorded the confessional statement of the accused and the Investigating Officer, who investigated the case. The learned Magistrate, upon appreciation of the evidences on record, both oral and documentary, by the judgment dated 2.12.2002, acquitted the accused-respondent from the charges by holding that the prosecution could not prove the charges against him beyond all reasonable doubt. Hence, the present appeal.

(3.) I have heard Miss Dinary T. Azyu, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Govt of Mizoram and Mr. PC Prusty, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused-respondent.