IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr. Appeal No. 244/2002. Decided on: May 14, 2009. _________________________________________________________ State of H.P. …..Appellants. Versus Gafoor Ali. …..Respondent. Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Surinder Singh, J. Whether approved for reporting1?Yes. For the appellant : Mr. J.S.Guleria, Assistant Advocate General. For the respondent : Ms. Nidhi Chawla, Advocate. _________________________________________________ SURINDER SINGH,J (oral): Respondent was trial by the learned trial Court for the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code in short the ‘code’ but he was sentenced under Section 471 of the Code to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for fifteen days, allegedly forging the school leaving certificate issued by the Head Master of Senior Secondary School, Majra with respect to the parentage and the date of birth while taking admission in 10th class in Govt. High School, Glana Ghat. In appeal filed by the respondent, the impugned judgment of conviction and sentence was set aside and he was acquitted Whether reporters of the Local papers are allowed to see the judgment? yes. 2 on the ground that the prosecution failed to establish that the forged school leaving certificate in question was used knowingly as a genuine document. The State felt aggrieved by the impugned judgment of reversal of acquittal, challenged in this appeal. Sh. J.S.Gueria, learned Assistant Advocate General vehemently argued that the learned lower appellate Court has committed a grave error while not appreciating the evidence established on record that the school leaving certificate Ext.P9 was a forged document and was prepared for the purpose of cheating and the forgery committed by the appellant stood proved, therefore there are grounds to restore the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the learned trial Court. Ms. Nidhi Chawala, learned counsel for the respondent supported the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge in appeal. I have given my thoughtful consideration to the rival contentions of the parties and have carefully gone through the record. In short, the case of the prosecution has been that the respondent herein was the student of 10th class in Senior Secondary School, Majra in the year 1991. He left the school and applied for the school leaving certificate on which Ext.P9 was issued to him on 30.9.1991 retaining its duplicate copy Ex.P13 countersigned by PW3 Sh.Arora. Thereafter he sought admission in Government High School, Glana Ghat. It is alleged that at the time of taking admission in Govt. High School, Glana Ghat, he has alleged to have forged the parentage and the date of birth from 8.3.1971 to 8.3.1974 in the school leaving certificate Ext.P9 issued by the previous institution, which fact came to the notice of the Head Master of Govt. High School, Glana Ghat 3 during verification the school records. Thus, he informed the District Education Officer vide his alleged complaint Ext.P7 and it was thereafter that a F.I.R. was lodged against him. The police investigated the case. Finding a prima facie case against the respondent, the challan was presented against the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 468, 465, 471 and 420 of the Code. The trial court convicted and sentenced the respondent but in appeal he was acquitted that is how the state in appeal. PW1 Sh. Guru Bachan Singh, Head Master, who was posted as Trained Graduate Teacher (T.G.T.) in Govt. High School, Glana Ghat at that time did not say anything about presenting of the alleged forged certificate Ext.P9 by the respondent while seeking admission. He also did not suspect at the time of the admission of the respondent that the certificate which was presented at that time was a forged document. There is nothing on record from where Ext.P9 the disputed certificate was taken into possession by the police. It is not known from where the Ext.P11 and Ext.P13 were obtained which are alleged to have been counter signed by PW3 Sh.S.K.Arora in the year 1992 and what was the occasion. Further Ext.P7 complaint is also a copy its original is not on record. In fact, the story of the prosecution itself appears to be a suspect from the very beginning. The evidence led is also not free from doubt. There is nothing on record to show that it was the respondent who either tampered with the parentage, his name and the date of birth or he had knowingly used a forged document to be a genuine one. The opinion of the hand writing expert is also not clear and is not corroborated by any other evidence of independent nature. This cannot be acted upon as not being conclusive to prove the charge. There is no 4 evidence with respect to taking the specimen signatures and writing of the appellant or his admitted writing on record. Thus for this reason also the opinion of the hand writing expert cannot be used against the respondent. As such, I do not find any illegality in the impugned judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Accordingly the appeal is dismissed. The respondent is discharged of his bail bonds entered upon by him at any point during the proceeding of the case. (Surinder Singh), Judge. May 14,2009(R)