Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.S. SARKARIA, P.N. SHINGHAL AND O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, JJ.
Chatt Ram, Appellant
Versus
State of Haryana, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 56 of 1973,
D/- 8-8-1979.
Evidence Act – Section 45 – Constitution of India, 1950 – Article 136 – Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 467, 471 – Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Section 164 – Lottery Tickets – Forged Documents – Prosecution case was that Joginder Lal along with one Sham Dass was a Sub-Agent of Haryana Lotteries. – Joginder Lal had borrowed a sum of amount from Chatt Ram and had not repaid loan, Joginder Lal as Sub-Agent sold Haryana State Lottery Tickets relating to 3rd Draw. – Those tickets were printed by Thompson Press – Third Draw of the Lottery was held and result was declared on same day by a State Government Notification – There were 501 prizes – There was also a Special Prize of a lakh of rupees – This prize was won by Ticket – Booklet containing tickets of X-series was sold to Express Lotteries Centre, who further sold it to their Sub-Agent, Shri Vijay Ram Andheram of Poona, from whom prize winning ticket was purchased by G. S. Kale – Chatt Ram appellant, Joginder Lal and Badri Nath were prosecuted jointly for offences under Sections 467 and 471 of Indian Penal Code – Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Badri Nath, but convicted appellant and his companion, Joginder Lal, under Sections 467 and 471, Penal Code and sentenced them to five years regorous imprisonment each, on each count with a direction that sentences shall run concurrently – On appeal, High Court, by a judgment, upheld conviction and sentence of appellant and his companion, and dismissed their appeals – Held, Even if it is assumed for sake of argument that number on Ex. P-3 had been forged, that by itself would not show that Chatt Ram, appellant forged it or participated in its forgery – Nor would the mere fact that Chatt Ram presented this ticket before officers concerned and claimed Special Prize on its basis, necessarily stamp him with knowledge or belief of its forged character – Nor were two circumstance pointed out by counsel for State such as would unerringly raise an inference that appellant possessed mens rea requisite for an offence under S. 471, Penal Code when he presented Ex. P-3 to officers concerned for claiming special Prize. – Two circumstances at most, raise a suspicion about requisite guilty knowledge or belief on part of appellant. – But suspicion is no substitute for proof – To sum up, even if evidence of P. Ws. 6, 12, 22 and 26 was assumed to be admissible under S. 45, Evidence Act, it was not sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt that ticket Ex. P-3 was a forged document – Further, even on assumption that ticket Ex. P-3 was a forged document, evidence on record did not indubitably lead to conclusion that appellant was concerned in forging it or had requisite guilty knowledge of its forged character when he presented it and claimed prize on its basis before officers concerned. – It is immaterial if at any subsequent point of time came to know of its forged character – Evidence on the record is insufficient to sustain the conviction of Chatt Ram appellant under Ss. 467 / 471 Indian Penal Code the legal question posed by the High Court is rendered wholly academic and it is not necessary to decide the same for the purpose of this appeal – Appeal Allowed
Judgment
R. S. SARKARIA, J. :- Chatt Ram appellant, Joginder Lal and Badri Nath were prosecuted jointly for offences under Sections 467 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Badri Nath, but convicted the appellant and his companion, Joginder Lal, under Sections 467 and 471, Penal Code and sentenced them to five years regorous imprisonment each, on each count with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently.
3. On appeal, the High Court, by a judgment dated June 2, 1972, upheld the conviction and sentence of the appellant and his companion, and dismissed their appeals.
4. The prosecution case was that Joginder Lal along with one Sham Dass was a Sub-Agent of Haryana Lotteries. Joginder Lal had borrowed a sum of Rs. 3,000 from Chatt Ram on March 21, 1968 and had not repaid the loan, Joginder Lal as Sub-Agent sold Haryana State Lottery Tickets relating to the 3rd Draw. Those tickets were printed by Thompson Press, Faridabad, for Haryana State. The Third Draw of the Lottery was held on March 29, 1969 and the result was declared on the same day by a State Government Notification No. DOL/69/1952. There were 501 prizes. There was also a Special Prize of a lakh of rupees. This prize was won by Ticket No. X-78410. The booklet containing tickets of X-series was sold to Express Lotteries Centre, Hatam Manzil, Bombay, who further sold it to their Sub-Agent, Shri Vijay Ram Andheram of Poona, from whom the prize winning ticket was purchased by G. S. Kale.
5. Joginder Lal in his capacity as Sub-Agent had come into possession of two blank numberless) tickets of Haryana State Lottery. According to the prosecution, the appellant and accused Joginder Lal planned to get No. X-78410 printed on one of those blank tickets in order to secure the Special Prize of one lakh. The scheme was that after collecting the prize money, half of it would go to Chatt Ram, while the remaining half would be divided equally between Badri Nath and Joginder Lal. In pursuance of that conspiracy No. X-78410 was got printed on the blank ticket by Badri Nath accused in his press at Faridabad, and thereafter, Joginder Lal and Chatt Ram along with others, approached the Treasury Officer, Gurgaon, and told him that they were in possession of the ticket which had won the Special Prize of one lakh. The Treasury Officer advised them to produce the ticket before the Director of Haryana State Lotteries on April 1, 1969, at Gurgaon, where he was expected on that day. Consequently, on April 1, 1969, Chatt Ram appellant and Joginder Lal accused and others, appeared before Shri J. K. Dhingra, Director of Haryana State Lotteries in the house of the Treasury Officer, Gurgaon and showed the ticket (Ex. P-3) to him (Director). On being asked by the Director, the Assistant Treasury Officer ( Shri A. N. Bansal) took down the signature and address of Chatt Ram on the reverse of the ticket (Ex. P-3).
6. Joginder Lal claimed to have sold that ticket to Chatt Ram. The Assistant Treasury Officer, therefore, directed Joginder Lal to produce the counterfoil for claiming the Sellers Prize and he promised do so after searching out the same. Later on, however, Joginder Lal never produced the counterfoil. The result was that neither Joginder Lal nor a the appellant got the prize money on the basis of the ticket (Ex. P-3), which, according to the prosecution, was a forged one.
7. On the other hand, three persons, namely, G. S. Kale, Kanti Lal and Dharam Singh, each produced a ticket bearing No. X-78410 to claim the Special Prize, before the Director, who held enquiries and got the tickets of all the rival claimants examined by Joginder Singh. Overseer of the Government of India Press, Joginder Singh, Overseer, after examination, opined that the ticket produced by G. S. Kale was genuine. The Director then sent a letter, dated April 30/Mar 1, 1969, to the Inspector-General of Police, for taking necessary "legal action" against Chatt Ram s/o Daulat Ram Ratra of Far
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
