A mere endorsement for calling a particular candidate for interview does not, in my opinion, hold out any promise that the selection would be made or even if it was made, the selected candidate would be appointed.

1. :- This is a reference, submitted by learned Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu, recommending that the order for the issue of process against the petitioner, K. K. Pandey, for the offence under Section 477, Indian Penal Code, be quashed.

2. Narpat Singh Deora, it is alleged, made a complaint to the Court of Munsiff-Magistrate, Khetri, on October 5, 1971, to the effect that the complainant had been working as U. D. C., in the Administration Wing of Khetri Copper Project since January, 1969. K. K. Pandey was working as personnel Manager there. In the aforesaid Project the post of Estate Supervisor fell vacant. Applications from prospective candidates for the post were invited by K. K. Pandey from the employees of the Corporation. In pursuance of the above invitation the complainant submitted an application. A scrutiny of the applications was made by the Assistant Personnel Officer (Recruitment) and after a searching look he recommended the name of the complainant along with one more candidate. The recommendation was duly endorsed by the Personnel Industrial Relations Officer. Thereafter the file was sent to the Chief Town Administrator for perusal and he in his turn recommended a number of names including the complainant. The Chief Town Administrator then sent the file to K. K. Pandey for the approval of the proposal. Personnel Manager, Khetri Copper Project, K. K. Pandey agreed with the recommendations of the Chief Town Administrator and reduced into writing that the candidates recommended by him be called for interview. Soon after the accused changed his mind and in order to accord benefit to another candidate and to cause damage to the complainant, he, with fraudulent and dishonest intention, completely defaced his own endorsement by pasting a chit thereon and thereby committed mischief with the document. The pasted piece of paper contained a different endorsement. The complainant after that defacement was not called for interview. The complainant was the most suitable person for the post as he was equipped with all the requisite qualifications. Had the accused not disfigured his own endorsement, the complainant stood a fair chance of selection. The endorsement made by the accused on the Chief Town Administrator's proposal created a legal right for the complainant to be called for an interview. It was a valuable security. The complainant, in the end, prayed that K. K. Pandey should be prosecuted under Section 477, Indian Penal Code, for tempering with the valuable security.

3. On receipt of the above complaint learned Munsiff-Magistrate, Khetri, examined Narpat Singh as P. W. 1, Chandra Prakash P. W. 2 and K. B. Chohan P. W. 3. Thereafter the Court ordered on December 15, 1971, that process be issued against K. K. Pandey, Personnel Manager, Khetri Copper Project, in connection with the alleged offence under Section 477, Indian Penal Code.

4. Against the above order a revision petition was filed in the Court of Sessions Judge, Jhunjhunu. Learned Sessions Judge is of the opinion that the contents found in the attached slip were identical with the endorsement originally made by Mr. Pandey in Ex. P.1. Both the endorsements bear the same date, i.e., August 30, 1971. It was not mentioned in the original endorsement that Narpat Singh should also be called for interview. Learned Sessions Judge then pointed out that no prima facie case could possibly be made out under Section 477, Indian Penal Code and the trial Court should not have issued process against the accused. Learned Sessions Judge, therefore, recommends that the impugned order of Munsiff-Magistrate, Khetri, passed on December 15, 1971, be quashed.

5. I have perused the reference submitted by learned Sessions Judge and have also heard at length the arguments put forth by learned counsel representing both the parties. The most important point in the case is whether there existed some material on the record to enable the Court to proceed under Section 477, Indian Penal Code. Se