STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. MADAN LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The respondent-accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') was tried by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amb on a charge under Sections 409,420,467,468 and 472, Indian Penal Code, and was acquitted vide judgment dated 24.4.1997. Feeling aggrieved, the State has preferred the present appeal against the said acquittal.

(2.) The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that the accused was posted as Temple Officer at Chintpurani Temple. On 10.5.1992 one Kundan Lal (PW-15) donated one air cooler to the said temple and in token thereof a receipt was issued to him. After 3-4 month thereof when his son visited the temple, he found that the air cooler had been removed from the temple and accordingly informed PW-15. In turn PW-15 made a complaint Ex.PW-15/A to the Superintendent of Police, Una, who directed investigation into the matter vide his endorsement Exc.PW-17/P by C.I.A. Staff, Una. On the basis of the inquiry conducted in the matter F.I.R. Ex.PW-171A under Sections 409,420,467,468 and 471, Indian Penal Code, was registered at Police Station, Amb and investigation followed. The receipt Ex.P-9 which was issued to FW-15 about the donation of the air cooler alongwith other record as maintained in the temple was taken in possession. The investigating agency also got the admitted writings and specimen writings of the accused which were sent to the questioned documents expert for opinion, who opined that the receipt Ex.P-9 was in the hand of a person who had written the specimen writings and sample writings i.e. in the handwriting of the accused. On arrest of the accused he made a disclosure statement Ex.PW-1/A on 27.7.1992 that he had kept cooler in question in a store and he could get it recovered. Pursuant to the said statement in the presence of PWs Krishan Kalia and Pitamber Raj the accused got the air cooler recovered from a store room, the key whereof was with Sudershan Kumar (PW-2). It was also found that the accused had forged the receipt Ex.P-9 and removed the air cooler to Hamirpur with dishonest intention. On being satisfied of the commission of the offences alleged to have been committed by the accused, the Officer-in-Charge; Police Station, Amb, submitted a charge-sheet against the accused. To prove the charge against the accused the prosecution examined as many as 3 witnesses. The accused was examined under Section 313, Code of Criminal Procedure, wherein he denied the prosecution, case and claimed that the Police officials were biased against him as.during his tenure as a Temple Officer he could not provide them proper accommodation in the temple premises as and when they were being deputed on temporary duty therein.

(3.) We have heard the learned Additional Advocate General for the State and the learned counsel for the accused and have also gone through the records.