CHANDMAL & ORS. Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The State of Rajasthan has preferred this appeal against the judgment dated 21-1-1970 of the Assistant Sessions Judge, Merta (headquarters, Nagaur) by which respondents Chandmal and Kanhaiyalal were acquitted of the offences under sections 468, 465, 471 and 474 I. P. C. Shri Chandmal respondent died during the pendency of the appeal and hence the appeal abated as regards him.

(2.) The prosecution case was as follows. The respondent and some other persons formed Khardia Multipurpose Co-operative Society Ltd. Respondents Kanhaiyalal and Chandmal were its President and Secretary respectively. Rs. 9,600 were received by the respondent on 24-6-1960 for distribution of loan to the members of the Society. Another sum of Rs. 7,600.00 was received by them on 16-12-1960. Respondent Kanhaiyalal further received a sum of Rs. 6,405.00 on 28-2-1965. It is alleged that most of this amount was not distributed by the respondent by way of loan and they forged numerous bonds in the name of several members of the Society acknowledging the receipt of loan with a promise for repayment. The defalcation was made to the tune of Rs. 13,465.00which was discovered by Shri Bhargava, Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Nagaur. Shri Bhargava lodged F. I. R. of the offence in police station, Nawa on 14-6-1963. A case was registered against the respondents and after usual investigation a challan was put up in the court of Munsif Magistrate, Nawa. The learned Magistrate held the committal enquiry and after finding a prima facie case exclusively triable by the Sessions Judge, committed the accused to face trial. Charges under sections 406, 458, 465, 471 and 474 Penal Code were framed against the respondents. They denied the offences and claimed to be tried. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge while convicting the respondents under section 406 Penal Code acquitted them of the remaining charges namely 465, 468, 471 and 474 I. P. C. Aggrieved by the judgment, the State has preferred this appeal. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge raised a point for determination whether the respondent forged bonds alleged to have been executed by Ramlal, Bhanwarlal, Lakh Singh, Ganesh, Moola Ram, Jairam, Doonga, Shiv Bux, Ruda, Nathuram, Chavand Singh, Hanuman Singh, Bhanwarlal, Sevaram and Devaram and further used them knowing them to be forged. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge further observed that the question of offences under sections 468, 471 and 474 could only arise if the prosecution is successful in proving the forgery of the aforesaid bonds. The learned Assistant Sessions Judge after discussing the evidence came to the conclusion that the prosecution has utterly failed to prove the forgery of any bond and hence acquitted the respondents.

(3.) We have heard the Public Prosecutor and the learned counsel for the respondent Kanhiyalal and have perused the evidence and record of the case care fully. The learned Public Prosecutor argued that forgery with regard to some of the bonds was proved while it was argued by the learned counsel for the respondents that there was no evidence worth the name to prove the forgery of any bond.