CHHAT RAM ETC. Vs. THE STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) DOES Section 45 of the Evidence Act create a bar against the admissibility of Expert testimony on the point of the questioned nature or otherwise of a printed document ? This is one of the material questions arising in this Criminal Appeal in which the two Appellants have been convicted and sentenced for having forged a valuable security and subsequently using the same as a genuine document.

(2.) THE facts disclose an ingenious attempt to use a forged ticket in order to obtain the first prize of rupees one lakh and over in the Haryana State Lotteries. The third draw of the above -said lotteries was held on the 29th of March, 1969, and the result was declared on the same day and subsequently published in a Government notification. The special prize of rupees one lakh and one ambassador car was declared to have been won by ticket number X -No. 78410. It is the case of the prosecution that all the tickets for the third draw were printed at the Thompson Press, Faridabad. Of these tickets including the one, which won the prize and the booklets containing the tickets of X series were sold by the Lottery authorities to Messrs Express Lotteries Centre, Hatam Manzil Bombay. The above -said concern further sold the relevant booklet containing 50 tickets which included the winning one to its Sub -Agent Vijay Ram Chander Dhamankar of Poona. The said Sub -Agent told the same to the genuine purchaser G. S. Kale who according to the prosecution is the true holder of the relevant ticket (Exhibit P. 1) and on the basis of the same he claimed the first prize.

(3.) THEREAFTER Joginder Lal and Chhat Ram Appellants along with some others contacted P.W. I. L. Dhingra then posted as a Treasury Officer at Gurgaon and informed him that they were in possession of the winning ticket. The latter advised them to produce the ticket before the Director of the Haryana State Lotteries, who was to arrive in Gurgaon on the 1st of April, 1969. Accordingly the two Appellants along with others appeared before the Director in the house of the Treasury Officer and presented the ticket Exhibit P. 3, upon which according to the prosecution the winning number had been forged. The Director asked the Treasury Officer to obtain the signatures and address of Chhat Ram Appellant on the reverse of the ticket and Shri A. N. Bansal the Assistant Treasury Officer obtained the signatures and addresses of both the Appellants as Joginder Lal appellant had claimed that he had sold the ticket above -said to Chhat Ram and was consequently also entitled to the prize given to the seller of the winning ticket. Joginder Lal Appellant was directed to produce the relevant counter -foil and he promised to do so after searching the same. However, the prosecution case is that this" Appellant later never produced the counter -foil nor claimed the prize which was the seller's due.