1 SNS IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT MUMBAI APPELLATE CRIMINAL JURISDICTION CRIMINAL REVISION APPLICATION NO.134 OF 2011 Satyavachansingh V. Karosia ...Applicant. v/s. The State of Maharashtra ...Respondent. Mr. R.D. Suryawanshi ,adv. For the Applicant. Ms U.V.Kejriwal, APP For the Respondent/State. CORAM : J.H. BHATIA, J. DATED : MARCH 25, 2011. P.C. 1 Heard the learned counsel for the parties. Applicant before this Court is the original accused. He was convicted for the offences punishable under Section 420 and 170 of the I.P.C. by J.M.F.C. Railway Court, Kalyan in R.C.C. No.128 of 1995 and had sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay fine of Rs.500/- under Section 420 and also R.I. for one year under Section 170 of the I.P.C. 2 Prosecution case in brief, is that, on 27.5.1995, the present applicant, who was working as a points man in the railways and not as Ticker Checker boarded in the railway train proceeding towards Kasara at Atgaon station and started checking the tickets of the passengers. He asked about the ticket from the complainant Jagdish Raje, who is P.W.8 but P.W.8 Jagdish told him that he had no ticket. The said Jagdish asked 2 the accused to pass the receipt but without passing any receipt, accused collected an amount of Rs.50/- from him and told him that there was one station only to go and he also assured that he would accompany Jagdish upto Kasara Railway Station. Saying so, accused went to some other compartment. At Khardi Station, two ticket checkers boarded and they asked Jagdish about the ticket. On this Jagdish informed them that one T.C. had already accepted the amount of Rs.50/- and had told him to tell this fact to anybody, who asked the ticket again. Said Ticket Checkers asked Jagdish to pay Rs.70/- and obtain ticket which he did. One of the ticket checkers alighted at Kasara and brought the accused at the office of station master. P.W.8 Jagdish also approached there and lodged report at Ex.35. P.W.1 Victor, who was T.T.E. deposed that on 27.5.1995, he alongwith another T.T.E Sawale boarded train proceeding towards Kasara. According to him, they were trying to find out if anybody was impersonating as T.C. in the train. According to him, accused came in the compartment when P.W.1 Victor was there. On enquiry, the accused replied that day was very bad and, therefore, he did not pass any receipt. When they got down at Kasara Railway Station P.W.8 Jagdish alongwith T.T.E. Sawale approached Victor and he told Victor that accused had 3 collected the amount of Rs.50/- without passing ticket. Victor asked him to show excess fare book as well as checking authority. Accused allegedly produced the metal badge of his senior T.T.E. and also showed a book of receipts, which revealed that he had collected money from the people. Articles and the amount of Rs.543/- were seized from the accused. Accused was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Sections 170, 420 and 468 of the I.P.C. The trial Court after hearing the prosecution evidence convicted him and sentenced as stated above. Appeal was dismissed. 3 After perusal of the prosecution evidence and the impugned judgment, I find no fault with the conviction of the accused. The learned counsel for the accused/appellant contended that he was falsely implicated. However, from the evidence of P.W.1 Victor and P.W.8 Jagdish, nothing has been brought out to show that they had any reason to falsely implicate the accused. It was suggested to P.W.8 Jagdish that he had falsely implicated the accused at the instance of the T.C. but nothing has come on record as to why Jagdish should make such false complaint at the instance of any T.C. In the cross-examination of P.W.1 Victor, nothing was suggested to him which could go to show that Victor has any reason to falsely implicate the accused. 4 4 The learned counsel contended that sentence awarded to the applicant was very harsh and because of the conviction and sentence, applicant has lost the job as points man with the Railway. If as a consequence of conviction and sentence, he has lost the job, he himself is responsible for the same and if the Railway employees without any authority impersonate T.C. and begin to collect money from the passengers, that is a serious offence. However, taking into consideration the amount collected by him in the local train, in my opinion, sentence of imprisonment of one year and some fine would be reasonable. 5 Revision Application is partly allowed. While the conviction of the accused for the offences under Sections 420 and 170 of the I.P.C. is maintained. He is sentenced to undergo R.I. for one year and to pay fine of Rs.500/- under Section 420 of the I.P.C. and to undergo R.I. For one year under Section 170 of the I.P.C. Substantive sentence of imprisonment for both the offences shall concurrently. (J.H. BHATIA,J.)