JUDGMENT

GOSWAMI, J.:— In this appeal by special leave the only point that arises for consideration is whether the appeal filed by the State of Madhya Pradesh in the High Court against the order of acquittal of the appellant under Section 465 read with Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code was competent under the law.

2. The accused (appellant) secured an appointment of Senior Operator Trainee in the Bhilai Steel Project by submitting two forged certificates. The first certificate was regarding his passing the Bachelor of Science examination with Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry, in 2nd Division from the University of Sagar. The second document was an attested copy of his Matriculation certificate in proof of age where his date of birth was shown as August 21, 1941.

3. The minimum educational qualification for the post was that the candidate must be a Science Graduate of a recognised University with any two of the three subjects Mathematics, Physics and Chemistry and the age limit was prescribed between 18 to 23 years as on 1-l0-1963.

4. The accused who registered himself as a Science Graduate in the Employment Exchange, Bhilai was sponsored for the about mentioned post on January 28, 1964. He was ultimately selected for the 174 post placing reliance on the aforesaid two certificates and he joined the appointment.

5. That, as it transpired prosecution was launched against the accused on the complaint of the Superintendent of Police, Delhi Special Police Establishment, Jabalpur, and a case was registered against him under Sections 182, 471 and 420, I. P. C. In due course a charge-sheet was submitted against the accused and he was tried under Section 465/471 and Section 420, 1. P. C. According to the prosecution the accused was born on August 21, 1936 and he had not passed his B.Sc. examination at all and after tendering the forged certificates procured the employment.

6. The accused was tried by the Special Magistrate, First Class, Jabalpur, for offences under Section 465 read with Section 471 and under 420 I. P. C. The trial court acquitted the accused under Section 465 read with Section 471, I. P.C, and convicted him under Sec. 420, I. P. C, and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-. The learned Additional Sessions Judge on appeal maintained the conviction but reduced the sentence to six months rigorous imprisonment maintaining the fine.

7. The State of Madhya Pradesh preferred an appeal to the High Court against the acquittal of the accused under Section 465 read with Section 471, I. P. C. The accused also preferred a revision application against his conviction under Section 420, I. P. C. Both the matters were heard together and by a common judgment the High Court dismissed the revision application of the accused and allowed the State s appeal and convicted the accused under Section 465 read with Section 471 and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year. Hence this appeal by special leave.

8. It is submitted on behalf of the appellant that the appeal to the High Court was not competent in view of the provisions of Section 417 (2) of the Criminal Procedure Code.

9. It is admitted that this case is governed by the old Criminal Procedure Code, 1898. We may, therefore; at once read S. 417, Criminal Procedure Code, so far as it is relevant for our purpose: "

417 (1) Subject to the provisions of sub-section (5), the State Government may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court from an original or appellate order of acquittal passed by any Court other than a High Court.

(2) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case in which the offence has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946, the Central Government may also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court from the order of acquittal."

X X X X X

10. Section 417, Criminal Procedur