IMPORTANT POINT
The court established that mere unsigned status of a caste certificate does not equate to forgery without evidence of intent to deceive, and that procedural requirements for prosecution under the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes Act must be strictly adhered to.

JUDGMENT/ORDER

1. This Criminal Revision Application is directed against the order of conviction and consequential sentence passed by the Court of Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Khadki (trial Court) on 2/9/2014 in R.C.C. No.179/2008 and the judgment and order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Pune on 28/9/2015, in Criminal Appeal No.493/2014, confirming the order of conviction and sentence by the trial Court. As such, it is a case of concurrent findings of facts.

2. The facts giving rise to the present revision application are as follows :

The applicant is alleged to have forged his caste certificate and used the same knowing it to be false and fabricated, to secure a job in Police Department way back in 1979.

The caste certificate was submitted to the Scheduled Tribe Certificate Scrutiny Committee, Pune in 2001. The Committee, vide its order dtd. 11/1/2007, concluded that the applicant did not belong to Koli Mahadeo, Scheduled Tribe, his caste claim towards the same is held invalid. The unsigned caste certificate issued to the applicant by the Tahsildar, Walva, Islampur, District Sangli on 2/2/1979 was cancelled and confiscated.

3. The Deputy Director-cum-Member Secretary of the Scheduled Caste Certificate Scrutiny Committee, vide its order dtd. 8/10/2007, directed the Special Inspector General of Police, C.I.D. to register crime against the applicant for offence punishable under Sec. 11 of the Maharashtra Scheduled Castes, Scheduled Tribes, De-Notified (Vimukta Jatis), Nomadic Tribes, Other Backward Classes and Special Backward Category (Regulation of Issuance and Verification of) Caste Certificate Act, 2000 and under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Shri Ramchandra Chandvilkar (P.W.1), Superintendent of Police, C.I.D., Pune, therefore, lodged the F.I.R. at the concerned Police Station. It has been alleged in the F.I.R. that, the applicant forged and fabricated the caste certificate and making use thereof, secured a job and thereby cheated the Government. On due investigation of the crime, the charge sheet came to be filed against the applicant herein. He pleaded not guilty. His defence is of false implication.

4. The prosecution examined 6 witnesses and produced in evidence certain documents. On appreciation of the evidence in the case, the trial Court convicted the applicant and consequently sentenced him to suffer varying terms of imprisonment. The details thereof are as under :

5. Heard. Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that, the crime came to be registered 28 years after the alleged offence. It was a caste certificate issued by the competent authority, namely Tahsildar. Inadvertently, the unsigned certificate was issued. Had the applicant guilty mind, he would not have submitted such a certificate way back in 1979 when he applied for the job in Constabulary. According to learned counsel, the fact that an unsigned certificate was issued, ipso facto does not lead to conclude the same to have been forged and fabricated by the applicant. The certificate was not examined by a handwriting expert nor the seal appearing thereon was compared with the seal of office of the issuing authority. None of the officials from the office of Tahsildar, Walva was examined. The Tahsil Office, Walva informed that the register of caste certificate issued in particular year i.e. in 1979 was not available with their office. According to the learned counsel, both the Courts below have, therefore, erred in convicting the applicant. According to him, the applicant has attained the age of superannuation. The Maharashtra Administrative Tribunal (MAT) came to his rescue, directing his office to reinstate the applicant in service subject to the outcome of the criminal prosecution. Since the applicant came to be convicted, he has been discharged from service. His service benefits have been withheld. He is in the evening of his life. The learned counsel ultimately urged for allowing the revision application.

6. The learned