STATE OF J&K Vs. CHAMAN LAL GANJOO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS case owes its origin to an anonymous complaint. It was alleged that the respondent has mutilated and changed the date of birth recorded in his original matriculation certificate from 16th of May, 1940 to 16th of May, 1948. It was further alleged that on the basis of this forgery made in the matriculation certificate, respondent has caused wrongful loss to State Exchequer and wrongful gain to himself by overstaying in government service and drawing salary and other pecuniary benefits. The anonymous complaint further made like allegations against other two employees as well. On this anonymous complaint, matter was referred to the J&K Board of School Education and Joint Secretary, Verification vide communication No. F(JS -VER)B/KD/04/V -1106 dated 26th of March, 2004 addressed to Mr. M.D. Banday, Deputy Director (Central), Accounts & Treasures, Finance Department, informed that the date of birth recorded in the certificate is fraudulently mutilated and was declared to be fake certificate. It was conveyed through this communication that as per the records lying with the State Board of School Education the actual date of birth of the candidate concerned is 16th of May, 1940. It was, therefore, concluded in this communication that certificate in question is fake and fraud. The said communication bears mark A. The investigation agency registered case FIR No. 13 of 2004 for commission of offence under section 420, 467, 468 and 471 RPC against the respondent. The investigating agency after completing its investigation came to prima facie conclusion that accused has committed offences and was accordingly send up for trial. The charge sheet has been framed by the trial court vide order dated 09th of October, 2004 as trial court was prima facie satisfied the accused need to be put on trial to afford the prosecution opportunity to prove the offence against the accused.

(2.) PROSECUTION out of eleven listed witnesses examined ten witnesses in support of its case. After the prosecution evidence was closed the accused was examined and the circumstances appearing against him were put to him. Respondent choose not to lead any evidence in his defense.

(3.) THE prosecution has examined PW Mohammad Amin who has deposed before the court that some migrant employees filed a complaint against the accused who at that time was working as Chief Accounts Officer, District Fund Office, Udhampur. Witness further stated that it was alleged that respondent has tampered with his service record and had produced a fake date of birth certificate. It was further deposed that complaint so received was sent to him by Deputy Director, same has been marked as EXPWMA. It was further deposed that respondent avoided to produce the documents but ultimately supplied Photostat copy of his service book and matriculation certification which thereafter was followed by production of original certificate. Further witness deposed that certificate was sent to Jammu and Kashmir State Board of School Education for verification who reported that certificate was fake. The communication received by the department of J&K State Board of School Education would inform that the certificate was fraudulently mutilated regarding date of birth and it was reported that date of birth of respondent is 16th of May, 1940. Thereafter on the basis of said communication, Government issue order 94 -F of 2004 dated 06th of April, 2004 vide which respondent was deemed to have retired from service. After preliminary enquiry the matter was referred to police agency for registration of case and in this backdrop, the case was registered against the respondent.