IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Revision No. 84 of 2001 (Old No. 119 of 1999) Amar Singh S/o Charan Singh Constable No. 41224 31 Bn. P.A.C., Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar. ...…………. Revisionist Versus 1. State of U.P. (Now State of Uttarakhand) ...…………. Respondents Mr. L.K. Tiwari, Advocate for the revisionist. Mr. B.S. Parihar, Brief Holder for respondent State. Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. This revision is directed against the judgment and order dated 12.01.1999, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, in Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1995, whereby said court has affirmed the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court (Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital), relating to offences punishable under Section 420, 468, 471 of I.P.C., in Criminal Case No. 1624 of 1993. 2 2) Heard Mr. L.K. Tiwari, learned Amicus Curiae for the revisionist and Mr. B.S. Parihar, learned Brief Holder for the respondent State. 3) Prosecution story in brief is that the revisionist Amar Singh got forged high school mark-sheet and a transfer certificate of an Institution for securing the job on the post of Constable in 39th Battalion, Provincial Armed Constabulary, Rudrapur. On the basis of said forged certificates he successfully got selected on 01.07.1981 as Constable No. 41224. For some five years he continued in the service. On 29.11.1986, the Commandant of 31st Battalion, P.A.C., lodged a report (Ext. A –1) against the revisionist that the documents on the basis of which he secured the job, were found on enquiry, to be false and forged. Crime No. 417 of 1986 was registered against the revisionist in respect of offences punishable under Section 420, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. with police station Rudrapur. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted charge sheet (Ext. A –3) against the accused / revisionist Amar Singh, for his trial in respect of offences punishable under Section 468, 470, 471 and 420 of I.P.C. After giving necessary copies to the accused, as required under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., and after hearing the parties, the trial court framed charge of offences punishable under Section 420, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. against the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. On this, prosecution got examined P.W. 1 Shivanand 3 (Principal of the College); P.W. 2 B.D. Tiwari (Head Clerk); P.W. 3 Ved Prakash Bansal (Head Clerk); P.W. 4 Naval Singh; P.W. 5 Head Constable Tahir; P.W. 6 Commandant Govind Ram; P.W. 7 Srikrishna Srivastava and P.W. 8 B.D. Sharma. The oral and documentary evidence was put to the accused under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. He alleged that the evidence adduced against him was false. However, he did not adduce any evidence in defence. After hearing the parties, the trial court (court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nainital) found accused Amar Singh guilty of charge of offences punishable under Section 420, 468, 471 of I.P.C. After hearing on sentence, on each of the count, the trial court sentenced the convict to rigorous imprisonment for a period of three years, and directed that all the sentences shall run concurrently. Aggrieved by said order dated 27.07.1995, passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Naintial, in Criminal Case No. 1624 of 1993, convict / appellant (present revisionist) preferred Criminal Appeal No. 23 of 1995, which was heard and disposed of vide order dated 12.01.1999, passed by Addl. Sessions Judge, Nainital, affirming the conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court against the convict Amar Singh. Hence, this revision. 4) Perusal of the record shows that it is an admitted to the revisionist that he had submitted the mark-sheet in question and transfer certificate in question to the 4 authorities concerned, with his application to seek job as Constable in the Provincial Armed Constabulary. However, the case of the accused is that the said documents were neither false nor forged. Perusal of the record further reveals that when P.W. 1 Shivanand (Principal of the Devnagri Inter College, Meerut) was examined by the trial court, he stated before the court that the seal of the Principal and signature on the transfer certificate are false and forged. He further told that Amar Singh S/o Charan Singh (revisionist) who had claimed to be student of said College and resident of Rambagh hostel, was never a student of said College, nor any such hostel existed. Not only this, on the basis of the original record, he further disclosed that the mark sheet dated 16.07.1999 which is said to have been relied by the accused Amar Singh with Roll No. 948291, was never issued by the College, nor it bears seal and signature of the authority of the College. The other witnesses have corroborated the prosecution evidence on record. There is no evidence adduced on behalf of the defence to controvert the statement made by the prosecution witnesses. In the cross-examination of the witnesses nothing has come out which creates any doubt as to the truthfulness of their statement made in examination-in-chief. 5) Having re-assessed the entire record, and after considering the submissions of learned Amicus Curiae for the revisionist and learned counsel for the State, this 5 Court finds no merit in this revision. The order of conviction of the revisionist is recorded by the trial court, affirmed by the appellate court in respect of offences punishable under Section 420, 468 and 471 of I.P.C. require no interference. However, on the point of sentence, considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the sentence awarded by the trial court is reduced to the period of two years rigorous imprisonment under each of the counts on which the revisionist was convicted, with other directions remaining the same. With this modification, the revision is dismissed. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Dt. March 15, 2010. H. Negi