The court emphasized the importance of independent evidence in establishing guilt and discussed the legal principles related to the comparison of disputed signatures and handwritings with admitted signatures and handwritings.

ORDER :

The revision petitioner herein was booked by the Thodupuzha police on the basis of a complaint preferred by the Sub Judge, Thodupuzha in connection with the forgery of succession certificate in O.P.No.03/1994 of the said court, and the attempt to collect the insurance amount and other benefits of the deceased wife of the revision petitioner making use of the above said forged document.

2. It is stated that the wife of the revision petitioner, who was a Captain in the Indian Army, met with unnatural death, in respect of which her mother and siblings raised complaint against the revision petitioner for having caused her death. The alleged attempt of the revision petitioner to whisk away the insurance money and other benefits of his wife by making use of forged succession certificate, was done shortly thereafter. In the trial conducted before the Judicial First Class Magistrate-II, Thodupuzha, 32 witnesses were examined from the part of the prosecution as PW1 to PW32 and 27 documents were marked as Exts.P1 to P27. Four material objects were also identified and marked as MO1 to MO4. After an evaluation of the above evidence and hearing both sides, the learned Magistrate found the revision petitioner guilty of commission of offence under Sections 466, 467, 468, 471, 475 and 511 of 420 I.P.C and convicted him. He was sentenced to simple imprisonment for two years each and a fine of Rs.2,000/- each for the offence under Sections 466, 468, 471 and 475 I.P.C and simple imprisonment for 2½ years and fine Rs.3,000/- for the offence under Section 467 I.P.C. For the offence under Section 511 of 420 I.P.C revision petitioner was awarded simple imprisonment for 1½ years and fine Rs.2,000/-. Appropriate default clauses of simple imprisonments for non-payment of fines were also provided in the aforesaid judgment dated 15.05.2003.

3. The Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc-II), Thodupuzha, in Crl.A.No.172/2003 confirmed the above verdict of the learned Magistrate and upheld the conviction and sentence. Aggrieved by the above concurrent verdicts of the trial court and the appellate court, the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision.

4. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

5. The verdicts of the courts below are challenged by the revision petitioner on three counts. Firstly, it is stated that the original succession certificate, and the original petition for the issuance of succession certificate alleged to have been forged by the revision petitioner, are not recovered by the investigating agency and brought in evidence. The above challenge of the revision petitioner has been rightly repelled by the appellate court stating the reason that the forged documents which the revision petitioner produced before the Army Insurance Department were in fact the documents purported to be certified copies of the succession certificate and petition for succession certificate issued from the Sub Court, Thodupuzha. The forgery committed by the revision petitioner in this regard came to the notice of the learned Sub Judge, who was examined as PW2 before the trial court, when the Army Insurance Department sent the photocopies of the above forged certified copy of succession certificate and the forged certified copy of the petition for succession certificate which are marked as Exts.P2 and P4 respectively, and a photocopy of the covering letter sent by the revision petitioner, which is marked as Ext.P3, to him, upon getting suspicious of the said documents. It is thereafter that the learned Sub Judge, having been convinced about the forgery and attempt to commit cheating on the part of the revision petitioner, preferred Ext.P1 complaint before the Circle Inspector of Police, Thodupuzha, which resulted in the commencement of investigation in this case. Later on, the investigating officer had recovered the forged certified copy of the succession certificate and the forged certified copy of the origin