2017 Supreme(Pat) 341
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PATNA
ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI, J.
(20.9.2017)
Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.595 of 2015
Siya Ram Sahu & Ors. : Appellants
Vs.
The State of Bihar Through C.B.I. : Respondent
For the Appellants : M/s Ajay Kumar Thakur, Imteyaz Ahmad.
For the Respondent: Mr. Sanjay Kumar.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860–Sections 467, 468, 420, 465, 471 IPC–Appellants alleged to have got their employment as primary teachers on the score of false documents–the then District Superintendent of Education disowning their signatures over the forged and fabricated documents which was not discredited in cross-examination nor their signatures were examined by the handwriting expert–respective witnesses also disowning their signatures over GPF Register, the salary register and further relieving letters, LPC–onus not properly discharged by the appellants by producing relevant documents–it is clear that on the basis of the forged and fabricated document, the appellants are ultimate beneficiaries and withdrawal of salary could amount to illegal gain at their end for which they were not at all entitled for–judgment of sentence and conviction affirmed–appeal dismissed. (Paras 31 & 32)
2. Before delving, brief history, as appears is to be taken note of. On the score of false documents some unscrupulous persons including appellants, some of whom died during trial, some of whom absconded, got their employment as primary teachers which was traced out in due course of time, as a result of which Jai Prakash Paswan, the then Block Education Extension Officer of Shahpur Kamal Block filed a written report as instructed by District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai whereupon Shahpur Kamal PS Case No. 60/97 was registered against, Kamleshwari Chaudhary, Siya Ram Sahu, Shiva Nandan Yadav and Paras Nath Choudhary. During midst of investigation, CWJC No.9847/1998 was filed under the banner of Public Interest Litigation narrating the fact that on the basis of forged documents so many persons are working as a teacher in differ primary schools wherein order was passed on 18.12.1998 directing the CBI to register a case and investigate the same whereupon, after lapse of eight years the CBI registered a case in the year 2006. During intervening period, as is evident from the record, charge-sheet was filed, charge had already been framed. However, it is evident that after registration of the case as well as submission of charge-sheet at the end of the CBI, the other eventualities as indicated above got merged felicitating the de novo trial. Co-accused, It is also evident from the record that Shivji Mahato was not sent up as he died during investigation while charge-sheet was filed against Ram Chandra Choudhary who absconded, Arvind Rai (Since acquitted), Kamleshwari Choudhary (since dead), Paras Nath Choudhary, appellant, Shiva Nandan Yadav, appellant and Siya Ram Sahu, appellant, who have faced trial and met with ultimate result, the subject matter of the instant appeal.
3. The gist of allegation is that accused, Kamleshwari Choudhary, the then teacher, Primary School, Mughalsarai, Siya Ram Sahu, the then teacher, Primary School, Mughalsarai, Shiva Nandan Yadav, the then teacher, Kanya Vidyalaya, Chouki, Paras Nath Choudhary, the then teacher, Primary School, Mughalsarai joined illegally at the respective Primary Schools lying within the block of Begusarai during 1995-1996 on the basis of forged transfer letter bearing forged signature of District Superintendent of Education, Begusarai purported to be issued vide Memo No. 2710, 2712 dated 20.12.1995 and 2884 dated 29.12.1994 and to facilitate the same, they have produced forged and fake LPC (Last Pay Certificate), Joining Letter, Relieving Letter bearing forged signature of concerned officials and on the basis thereof, they have drawn their salary from the respective schools and misappropriated the same.
4. As indicated above, CBI had registered the case under Sections 420 IPC, 465 IPC, 467 IPC, 468 IPC, 471 IPC, 120B IPC as well as 13(2) read with 13(1) (D) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and proceeded with the investigation and after concluding the same, submitted charge-sheet, facilitating the trial which ultimately concluded by way of recording a finding of guilt against the appellants while acquitting Arvind Rai, subject matter of instant appeal.
5. The defence case as is evident from the mode of cross-examination as well as statement recorded under S