CRR No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Revision No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision:- 05.09.2011 Jagjit Singh ....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Mr. Davinder Lubana, Advocate, for the petitioner. ***** A.N. JINDAL, J. (ORAL) This petition assails the judgment dated 13.08.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, dismissing the appeal preferred by the accused-petitioner (hereinafter referred as 'the petitioner') against the judgment dated 19.08.2006 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Patiala, convicting the accused under Section 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC and sentencing him as under:- 1. Under Section 420 and : Rigorous imprisonment for a 468 IPC period of one year and fine of Rs.500/-, on each count. 2. Under Section 465 and : Rigorous imprisonment for a CRR No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) 2 471 IPC period of six months, on each count. However, the Appellate Court, while dismissing the appeal, acquitted him under Section 465 IPC and confirmed the conviction under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC. Case against the petitioner was registered on the basis of a letter No.20676-84/Steno dated 01.09.1998, written by Shri Gurdeep Singh, Commandant Ist Indian Reserve Battalion, Patiala, to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Patiala, to the effect that the petitioner was recruited in their Battalion as Constable vide office order No.5593-OSI dated 25.03.1998, while claiming that he was a matriculate of 1994 and had presented a matriculation certificate of the year 1994 bearing Roll No.19897. When the said certificate was got verified from Punjab School Education Board, Mohali (issuing authority), the Secretary of the Board vide letter No.6559/verification 95-96 dated 10.08.1998 had intimated that roll No.19897, as disclosed by the petitioner in the certificate, was never issued to the examinees for the matriculation examination held in March, 1994 and the said certificate was forged. When the petitioner was confronted by a show cause notice to the effect, as to why he be not removed from service for playing fraud, he failed to say anything. Ultimately, he was removed from service and the FIR was also got registered against him. On completion of investigation, report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted. Consequently, he was charged under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC, to which, he denied and opted to face trial. Prosecution, in order to establish the charges, CRR No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) 3 examined HC Paramjit Singh (PW-1), Varinder Madan (PW-2), Gurdeep Singh (PW-3), ASI Angrej Singh (PW-4), ASI Harpal Singh (PW-5), Narinder Singh (PW-6) and ASI Avtar Singh (PW- 7). While denying the incriminating circumstances put to him under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the petitioner pleaded his false implication in the case. In defence, he examined HC Shamsher Singh (DW-1) and tendered into evidence documents Ex.D1 to Ex.D10. The trial resulted into conviction. His appeal also met the same fate with certain modification in the sentence. Amongst other contentions raised by learned counsel for the petitioner, he has contended that prosecution has miserably failed to establish, if the certificate produced by the petitioner was not genuine. The original certificate was not produced or got verified and only photocopies were relied, on the basis of which, no forgery could be detected. There is no evidence on the record to prove that the certificates produced by the petitioner were forged and he intentionally presented the same. Heard. Two documents i.e. copies of matriculation certificate and detailed marks certificate, were produced by the petitioner, bearing Roll No.19897, allegedly received by him on the basis of the matriculation examination conducted in the year 1994 and obtained employment. Varinder Madan, an officer from the Punjab School Education Board, Mohali (PW-2), has categorically stated that the roll No.19897, as claimed by the petitioner, has not been issued to him. Actually, Roll No.19191 to CRR No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) 4 20000 were not issued to any student. He has also placed on record copy of the Gazette notification as Ex.PW2/A, which also indicates that the petitioner was not issued the said Roll number. It is not a case of misprinting of the result or unintentional missing of the issuance of Roll number. But, as per statement of Varinder Madan (PW-2), Roll No.19191 to 20000 were not intentionally issued to any examinee. The petitioner appears to have got benefit of this fact and got forged these documents and presented the same for getting the job. The petitioner had obtained job on the basis of these two documents, the original of which, must be in his possession. Therefore, had he been true to his version about the genuineness of these documents, on the basis of which he had obtained the job then he could produce the same in order to remove the curtain of mystery and bring the truth to the fore. But, he neither produced the original documents nor he summoned any officer of the Punjab School Education Board to prove the authenticity of these documents, so that he could maintain his job and could not be prosecuted for such serious offences. The petitioner forged certificates to cause wrongful benefit to himself and wrongful loss to the State. He knew very well that he had not cleared the matriculation examination and he was presenting the copies of those certificates before the authorities, just to dodge them and thereby succeeded in his mission. Therefore, the offence under Section 471 IPC stands attracted. As per provisions of Section 471 IPC, whoever fraudulently uses as genuine any document, which he knows or having reason to believe to be forged document, is to be punished CRR No.2021 of 2011 (O&M) 5 in the manner, as if he has forged such document. Since the petitioner knowing fully well that he is using the document, which is forged one, for getting a job, therefore, the offence Under Section 471 IPC stands established. Similarly, the element of cheating on the basis of forged documents is established, as such, the petitioner has been rightly held guilty under Sections 420, 468 and 471 IPC by the Appellate Court. No merit. Dismissed. (A.N.JINDAL) 5th September, 2011 JUDGE ajp