Court acquits alleged CRPF cop in forgery case

20/01/2019

JAMMU, JAN 19: Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul acquitted one Narinder Kumar S/o Rattan Lai R/o Rajwal, Tehsll Akhnoor A/P Ward No:7, Akhnoor who claim to be CRPF cop and and can arrange service for recruitment in C. R. P.F.
According to the police case that accused has been prosecuted for the offence punishable under section 420/467/468/171/201 RPC by the police of P/S Akhnoor. The allegations against the accused are that one Anil Sharma lodged a . report with Police Station Akhnoor that he is residing in Akhnoor and came in contact with accused Narinder Kumar who is also residing in Akhnoor and claimed that he is working in CRPF and can arrange service for recruitment in Cr.P.F. Since, complainant Anil Sharma was unemployed he gave Rs. 80,000/- to the accused for recruitment and appointment order. Thereafter accused also took away Alto Car No: JK02AF-4240 from the complainant.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul after hearing Adv Vishal Mahajan for the accused observed that Document which purports to be a valuable security or a will or an authority to adopt a son etc. So forgery of a document to fail within the purview of section 467/RPC must be regarding a document mentioned in section 467/RPC and section 468/RPC is attracted when forgery of a document is done for the purpose of heating, so in both the cases, what is to be established that the document has been forged. Forgery is defined in Section 463 and Section 464 deals with making of false document So to hold the person guilty for the said offences the main ingredient to be proved is that a false or not and whether such documents was prepared by such person. Whether a document is a false or not and whether suchdocument was prepared by the accused could be established when such document Is got scientifically examined and scientific evidence obtained regarding the authorship of such document The Investigating Officer/ Prosecution was required to send these documents to the forensic Lab, get the documents examined by the expert, ought to have obtained specimen writings and pecimen signatures and got the same compared and analyzed by the expert This has not been done in this case, thus, there is no evidence as to whether such documents which The witnesses have claimed to have been given to them by the accused, were prepared by him or not.
There Is also no evidence produced by the prosecution to hold the accused guilty for offence punishable under sections 420,171 or 201 RPC No evidence to prove that accused was wearing the uniform of CRPF with the intention that It may be believed that he belongs to the CRPF.
Had he been wearing such uniform to make the people believe that he was member of such force, then such evidence ought to have been recorded and produced before the Court. No such evidence to say that he was seen wearing such uniform or n was believed by anybody who saw him that he is member of any such force, as such, in the absence of any such evidence, u cannot be said that prosecution has proved the offence punishable under section 171 RPC. Therefore having regard to the evidence produced by the prosecution and in view of the discussion made above the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond any doubt, as such the challan is dismissed accused is acquitted his bail bond and surety bond shall also stand discharged. JNF

Share This Story


Comment On This Story

 

Photo Gallery

  
BSE Sensex
NSE Nifty