BINOD RAM Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. Abhishek Sinha, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. Vijay Kumar Roy, learned A.P.P. for the State.

(2.) This application is directed against the judgment dated 10.05.2000 passed in Criminal Appeal No. 133 of 1995 by the 6th Additional & Sessions Judge, Palamau at Daltonganj whereby and where under the judgment dated 17.11.1995 passed in Sadar Town P. S. Case No. 72 of 1991 by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st class, Daltonganj by which the petitioner has been convicted under Sec. 466/468/471 and 420 of I.P.C. and sentenced to undergo R.I. for 3 years has been affirmed.

(3.) It has been stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner had bona-fide obtained employment in the Collectorate on the posts of Clerk cum Typist, but on account of some discrepancy in the attested copy of the mark-sheet and the original mark-sheet of the matriculation, the petitioner apart from being terminated from service has also been prosecuted. It has been stated that the petitioner has fulfilled all the requisites criteria and the discrepancy which has occurred in the original mark-sheet as compared to the attested mark-sheet does not concern the petitioner which fact has not properly been appreciated by the learned courts below. It has been stated that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove its case with respect to alleged forgery by the petitioner. Learned counsel in the alternative has argued that the petitioner is facing the rigors of prosecution case since the year 1991 and has been sufficiently punished and on account of the conviction, his services has also been terminated.