Judgment

DUA, J. :- In this appeal by special leave the short question requiring determination is whether the High Court of Gujarat was justified in dismissing in limine with one word "dismissed" the appellants appeal against their conviction by the Sessions Judge, Jamnagar for offences under S. 420 read with Ss. 511 and 34, I.P.C. and under S. 474 read with S. 34, Indian Penal Code.

2. Both the appellants were charged on five counts in the Court of the Sessions Judge relating to offences inter alia, of forging railway receipts purporting to be valuable security, being in possession of forged receipts knowing them to be forged and of dishonestly and fraudulently using the forged receipts as genuine knowing them to be forged, in furtherance of the common intention of cheating the Indian Railways or attempting to cheat them.

3. The points which arose for determination in the trial Court as stated in its judgment were :

"(1) Whether the prosecution has proved that on or about 7-8-71 at Jamnagar accused No. 1 Mustaq Ahmed Mohamed Hussein and accused No. 2 Mukhtar Hussein Ali Hussein Sayed in furtherance of common intention of both to cheat the Indian Railway by using forged railway receipts actually forged three railway receipts marked 6/A, 6/B and 6/C purporting to be valuable security and thereby committed an offence punishable under Section 467 read with S. 34, I.P. Code?

(2) Whether the prosecution has proved that on or before 7-8-71 said accused Nos. 1 and 2 in furtherance of the common intention of both to cheat Indian Railway forged railway receipts marked 6/A, 6/B and 6/C intending that they shall be used for the purpose of cheating thereby committed the offence punishable under Section 468 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code?

(3) Whether the prosecution has proved that said accused Nos. 1 and 2 on or about 7-8-71 in furtherance of common intention of both to cheat Indian Railway fraudulently or dishonestly used as genuine the three railway receipts marked 6/A, 6/B and 6/C which they knew or had reason to believe at the time they used them to be the forged documents and thereby committed by offence under Section 471 read with Section 34, I.P.C. ?

(4) Whether the prosecution has proved that on or about 7-8-71 both the said accused nos. 1 and 2 were in possession of the forged railway receipts purporting to be valuable security knowing the same to be forged and intending that the same shall be fraudulently used as genuine documents and thereby committed an offence punishable under S. 474 read with Section 34, I.P.Code?

(5) Whether the prosecution has proved that on or about 7-8-71 accused Nos. 1 and 2 were at Jamnagar and in furtherance of common intention of both of them to cheat Indian Railway attempted to cheat Western Railways by dishonestly inducing the railway employees, i.e., the goods clerk at Jamnagar railway station to deliver them Coal Wagons in question and thereby committed the offence punishable under S. 420 read with S. 34 and S. 511 of the Indian Penal Code?"

4. On points nos. 1 to 3 the decision of the trial Court went in favour of the appellants and against the prosecution but on points nos. 4 and 5 the appellants were held guilty and convicted. They were sentenced under S. 420 read with Ss. 511 and 34, I.P.C. to rigorous imprisonment for three years and a fine of Rupees 1,000/- with further rigorous imprisonment for nine months in case of default in payment of fine. A similar sentence was imposed on each one of them for the offence under Sections 474/34, I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently. It appears from the judgment of the trial Court which covers about forty pages of exhaustive discussion on the points raised that a large number of witnesses were examined at the trial and the Court entertained considerable doubt with respect to the prosecution story on several aspects of the various charges framed against the appellants.

5. On appeal in the High Court the appellants challenged