KING-EMPEROR Vs. SAGARMAL AGARWALLA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused Sagarmal was tried before the Sessions Judge of the Assam Valley Districts on two charges, firstly with having forged an Ekrarnama Ex. 2, a valuable security purporting to have been executed by Kanai Lal on 21 January, 1905, and secondly with having fraudulently and dishonestly used as genuine by filing in the Court of the Extra Assistant Commissioner Mr. Section Goswami in Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code proceeding in 1922 the Ekrarnama Ex. 2 purporting to have been executed by Kanai Lal on 21 January, 1905, which he knew or had reason to believe at the time of filing to be a forged document. The jury returned a unanimous verdict of not guilty. The learned, Sessions Judge disagreeing with the jury's verdict on the second charge has thought it necessary to refer this case to this Court under the provisions of Section 307 of the Criminal P. C..

(2.) The main facts of the case are as follows : On the 21 November, 1904, Kanai Lal purchased a piece of land from Ram Chandra Brahmin for 1,000 Rupees. On the 9 March, 1905, Kanai Lal died leaving a widow Musst. Gigi. Kanai Lal left several debts and Gigi executed a deed of sale in respeot of this land to one Joy Narain. It appears that though the document executed was a valid deed of sale, there was some contemporaneous verbal arrangement between the widow and Joy Narain that Joy Narain should hold the property as trustee for Kanai Lal's creditors, and after paying off Kanai Lal's debts out of the profits from the property, should restore it to the widow. Effect was given to this arrangement and on the 24 April 1917, Joy Narain re-transferred the land to her. The land was in three plots occupied by different tenants. On one of those plots the tenant Ghaneswam had erected a mill. On the 18 August, 1920, the accused Sagarmal purchased the mill and Ghaneswam's interest in this plot. On the 1 March, 1921, Sagarmal sold to Nagarmal the complainant the property purchased from Ghaneswam. Nagarmal was given possession of the mill, and it was arranged that possession of some other buildings in the property should not be delivered for three months. Sagarmal failed to keep his promise and on the 10 June, 1921, Nagarmal instituted a suit against Sagarmal for possession. On the 30 July, 1921, Sagarmal dispossessed Nagarmal from the mill by locking it up. Nagarmal then instituted proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code and got possession of the mill and the other houses in this plot of land through the court. Then on the 6 July, 1922, Sagarmal instituted fresh proceedings under Section 145, Criminal Procedure Code in respect of the land on which the mill stood, and in the course of these proceedings on the 18 October, 1922, he filed a document Ex. 2 which is the document alleged to be forged in which the present prosecution is based.

(3.) This document is an Ekrarnama which purports to be executed by Kanai Lal on the 21st January, 1905. In it Kanai Lal acknowledges that Sagarmal had bought the land benami in his name, and that it will be returned to Sagarmal after 20 years, and during that period Kanai Lal would enjoy the land, but would have no right to transfer the same by sale or otherwise. It also provides for re-entry by Sagarmal in the case of transfer. In the meantime Nagarmal had brought two civil suits t against Sagarmal; one on the 10 June, 1921, which was decreed in Nagarmal's favour on the 10 May, 1922, after reference to arbitration. Then on the 15th November, 1922, he brought a second suit on the basis of a lease which he had obtained from the widow Gigi, and that suit was decreed ex-parte on the 4 January, 1923. When the document Ex. 2 was filed in the Section 145 case, a few days later on the 24 October, 1922, a petition was filed on behalf of Sagarmal stating that there were good grounds for believing the Ekrarnama to be a forgery, and asking the court to put its signature on both its sheets and to note the letters appearing in the water mark of the cartridge paper of the second sheet.