HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 1797 of 2003 DATE:03.03.2010 Between: K. Munirathnam … Petitioner and State of A.P. represented by I Town P.S., Chittoor, Chittoor District, A.P. rep.by Public Prosecutor, High Court of A.P., Hyderabad … Respondent HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 1797 of 2003 JUDGMENT: The petitioner herein was tried by the Special Mobile Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Chittoor, for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 417 IPC in C.C.No.296 of 2000. Having considered the oral and documentary evidence, the trial court found the petitioner guilty of the offences, and accordingly, convicted and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC and also sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for six months for the offence under Section 471 IPC, by judgment dated 06.02.2001. The court below did not award any separate sentence for the offence punishable under Section 417 IPC, in accordance with Section 71 IPC. Questioning the said judgment, the petitioner filed Crl.A.No.31 of 2001 on the file of the VIII Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Chittoor. The learned Sessions Judge, allowed the appeal in part, by judgment dated 13.11.2003, setting aside the judgment of the trial court in so far as the conviction and sentence imposed against the petitioner for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC, while confirming the judgment of the trial court in all the other aspects. Being aggrieved by the same, the petitioner preferred the present revision. 2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that on 22.02.1971 the accused was appointed as Watchman in Government Arrack Depot. Subsequently, he submitted an application through the Excise Superintendent, Chittoor, seeking promotion as Excise Constable stating that he has studied up to 9th class. After considering his application, he was promoted as Excise Constable on 28.11.1993. Thereafter, having suspicion about the qualification of the accused, the Deputy Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Ananthapur, instructed P.W.6 the Assistant Commissioner of Prohibition and Excise, Chittoor, to verify the genuineness of the certificate submitted by the accused, who in turn, deputed P.W.2 the Assistant Superintendent of Prohibition and Excise, Chittoor. On verification of the records in Z.P.High School, Kanipakam, P.W.2 came to the conclusion that no transfer certificate was issued to the petitioner by the authorities of the said school and the certificate produced by him was a bogus certificate. Consequently, the accused was reverted to the lower cadre as watchman. Subsequently, basing on a complaint, the I Town P.S., Chittoor, registered a case in Crime No.7 of 1996 against the petitioner. After completion of investigation, a charge sheet was filed against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 471 and 417 IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 3. During the course of trial, on behalf of the prosecution, P.Ws.1 to 7 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.14 were marked. On behalf of the defence, D.W.1 was examined and Exs.D.1 and D.2 were marked. 4. Having considered the submissions made by the counsel on either side and also the judgments impugned in this revision, this Court is of the view that it is not a case where interference is required. In fact, the lower appellate court has rightly come to the conclusion that the petitioner is not guilty of the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC and accordingly acquitted him of the offence. In so far as the other offences punishable under Sections 471 and 417 IPC are concerned, this Court is of the considered view that the petitioner has filed a forged certificate with a dishonest intention. Hence, this Court finds no merit in this revision. However, taking into consideration the fact that the alleged offence took place long back i.e. on 22.02.1971 and also the petitioner was in jail for a period of more than one month, this Court takes a lenient view and reduces the sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment imposed against the petitioner for the offence under Section 471 IPC to that of the period already undergone by him and in so far as the fine amount is concerned, it is confirmed. 5. Accordingly, the criminal revision case is disposed of. ______________________ GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA 3rd March, 2010 CBS HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE GOPALA KRISHNA TAMADA CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No. 1797 of 2003 (Disposed of ) Date:03-03-2010 CBS