ALI AHMAD Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The appellant has boon found guilty by the unanimous verdict of the jury of an offence punishable under Secs.471/467, I. P. C., and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a term of two years and also to pay a fine of Rs. 500 with a further term of six months rigorous imprisonment in default.

(2.) The appellant is a Mahomedan Marriage Registrar and on 16 April 1928 he filed a rent suit in the Court of the Hatiya Munsif against one Mafijur Rahman. The plaint in the suit was in the hand-wring of Makbul Ahmad, the appellant's karmachari and tadbirkar. On 23 July 1928 a ferishti, also in the handwriting of Makbul, was filed and with it a document purporting to be signed by Matijur Rahman and to be the kabuliyat upon which the appellant based his claim. On 28 August 1928 Mafijur filed his written statement in which he stated the kabuliyat to be a forgery and asked for its safe custody, and a further application to impound the document was made by him on 20 December 1928. On 11 March 1929 the rent suit was transferred from the file of the Hatiya Munsif to the file of the Sadar Munsif. On 14 May 1929 the appellant applied for and obtained inspection of the document, and on the following day he filed a petition in which he repudiated the document as being forged and stated that he had had nothing to do with its being filed.

(3.) On 31 May 1929 the appellant's suit was dismissed. The Sadar Munsif thereupon proceeded to take action under Section 476, Criminal P. C., and made a complaint to the effect that the appellant had committed offences under Secs.193 and 467/471, I. P. C. The appellant appealed to the District Judge under the provisions of Section 476-B, Criminal P. C. On 23 December 1929 the District Judge disposed of the appeal by withdrawing the complaint under Section 193, Criminal P. C, but dismissing the appeal in other respects. The appellant proceeded to move this Court in its civil revisional jurisdiction and obtained a Rule against the order of the District Judge dismissing his appeal under Section 476-B, Criminal P. C. This rule was discharged by C. C. Ghose and Patterson, JJ., on 28 May 1930. The appellant was, on 29 June 1931 committed to the Court of Session on charges framed under Secs.467/109 and 467/471, I. P. C.