STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. JEEVAN KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Both these appeals have arisen from the same judgment passed in Criminal Case No.149-I/1995, 13-2/1996, by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, on 27.6.2002, whereby respondent Rumal Singh was acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, whereas respondent Jeevan Kumar in Criminal Appeal No.44 of 2003 was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced till rising of the Court and to pay a fine of `3,000/- with default clause and acquitted for the offences under Section 420 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The State has challenged the acquittal, of respondent Rumal Singh for all the offences and that of Jeevan Kumar for the offences punishable under Section 420 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code for which he was acquitted.

(3.) In short, the prosecution case can be stated thus. In the month of October, 1992 there was a recruitment-rally for the enrolment in the Indian Army. 22 candidates including respondent Jeevan Kumar were selected. He alongwith others was required to produce the original matriculation certificates and other documents. It is alleged that he produced certificate bearing Sr. No.18032 regarding passing of his matriculation examination from the Himachal Pradesh Board of School Education, Dharamshala. Thus, the Branch Recruiting Officer, Palampur sent the said certificate for its verification. The Board authorities reported that it was fake and the Secretary of the Board Shri R.C. Kapil, lodged the report to the police vide his letter Ext.PW1/A. The Recruiting Officer also recorded the statement dated 24.12.1992 Ext.P-3 of respondent Jeevan Kumar, in the presence of Tilak Raj and PW3 Tara Chand whereby he admitted having purchased it from ` 1,000/-. This fact respondent Rumal Singh for a sum of was admitted by respondent Jeevan Kumar in the presence of his mother and PW2 Man Singh. On the conclusion of the investigation, a case under Sections 420, 468 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code was found against the respondents. As such, they were impleaded as accused and Challan was presented in the Court for their trial.