STATE OF H.P. Vs. BALDEV KUMAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present criminal appeal has come up for consideration after the leave to appeal has been granted under Section 378(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, in reference to judgment dated 8th May, 2002, acquitting the accused Respondent by learned Sessions Judge, Bilaspur, H. P. , in Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1997 (Shri Baldev Kumar v. State of H. P. ) preferred under Section 374 Code of Criminal Procedure against the judgment dated 16th December, 1996 of learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Bilaspur, passed in Case No. 176/2 of 1995/91, convicting the Respondent / accused for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him (a) to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 420 IPC, (b) rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 5000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for one year for the offence punishable under Section 467 IPC, (c) rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for six months, under Section 468 IPC and (d) rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months, under Section 471 IPC, however, ordering the sentences to run concurrently.

(2.) In order to adjudicate the present criminal appeal, we notice that on 30.3.1990, Shri S. R. Karad, the then Excise & Taxation Officer, In-charge M. P. Barrier, Swarghat, District Bilaspur, H. P in a routine checking to Shri Naina Devi Ji Barrier, checked two buses No. CHW-5609 and CHW-4109 coming from Gowalthai side. The Passenger Taxation Receipt was checked. On checking of such receipt, it was found that the serial number of the receipts were not one after the other. On further checking of Daily Collection Register, it was also noticed that one of the receipt mentioned herein-above was not entered in the Daily Collection Register. On noticing prima-facie irregularity, a report was lodged with Superintendent of Police, Bilaspur and after investigation, it was found that the Respondent / accused had made the forged receipts as genuine for the purpose of cheating, as such, the Respondent / accused was charged for the aforesaid offences and the case was tried by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution has examined as many as twelve witnesses, whereas, the Respondent / accused, through his testimony under Section 313 Cr. P. C. , has denied the prosecution case.