LAKSHMINARAYAN TRIPATHY Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was convicted by the Subdivisional Magistrate, Nowrangpur, under Section 170, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment. On appeal, the conviction and sentence have been affirmed by the Agency Sessions Judge, Koraput. The charge against the petitioner was as follows: That you between 16 October 1941 and 26 October 1941 falsely personated a C.I.D. Police officer and in such assumed character (1) promised to appoint P.W. 3 Padmalav Misra as a police constable at Koraput, wrote something purporting to be an order in Ex. D and took a stamped envelope from P. W. 3 saying that the said order would be dispatched to Koraput (2) and secondly visited village Dhamanahandi under colour of such office and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 170, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The facts that led to the prosecution of the petitioner are briefly as follows: On 26 October 1941, P.W. 2 a hotel keeper, went to the police station at Kotpad and reported that the petitioner had been representing himself as a C.I.D. Police officer for the past ten days and in that capacity had induced him to give him meals on credit. The Sub-Inspector registered a case of cheating under Sections 419/420, Indian Penal Code. He went to the petitioner's house and searched it. It transpired that the petitioner, under the colour of a representation that he was a C.I.D. Police officer, did the acts referred to in the charge. He was then sent up for trial, and he was tried on the charge under Section 170, stated above. With regard to the second part of the charge, the learned Sessions Judge considered that the evidence was not sufficient to justify a conviction on that part of the charge. As regards the first part of the charge, the learned Sessions Judge found upon the evidence that there can be no doubt that the accused represented himself to be a C.I.D. Police officer, J although he was not so in fact. He also found that the accused promised to P.W. 3, who is a servant of the hotel keeper P.W. 2, that he would appoint P.W. 3 as a constable, and wrote something purporting to be an order on a paper Ex. D which was signed by P.W. 3.

(3.) The paper Ex. D was recovered from the house of the accused in the course of search. The accused admitted to have written it, but he said that he did so for fun. The writing in Ex. D is in English, but, as observed by the learned Judge, it is unintelligible and nonsense. The learned Judge held that the first part of the charge was fully established and the accused was guilty under Section 170. It is contended by Mr. G.G. Das for the petitioner that on the findings it cannot be said that the accused, though he might have pretended to be a C.I.D. Police officer, did not do any act under colour of such office within the meaning of Section 170. The Section runs as follows: Whoever pretends to hold any particular office as a public servant, knowing that he does not hold such office or falsely personates any other person holding sueh office, and in such assumed character does or attempts to do any act under colour of such office, shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to two years, or with fine, or with both.