NAFR HIGH COURT of CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRR No. 414 of 2013 Rajendra Prasad, S/o Sahdev Prasad Suryawanshi, aged about 35 years, R/o Village Kosir, Post and P.S. Pamgarh , Distt. Janjgir Champa C.G.

---- Applicant Versus State of Chhattisgarh Through District Magistrate, Bilaspur C.G.

---- Non-applicant (Cause-title taken from Case Information)

For Applicant : Ms. Meenu Banerjee, Advocate.

For Respondent/State : Mr. Amit Buxy, Panel Lawyer.

Hon'ble Shri Ramesh Sinha , Chief Justice

Order on Board

18/03/2024

1. This criminal revision is preferred against the judgment and order dated 03.05.2013 passed by the 4^th Additional Session Judge of 1^st Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.), in Criminal Appeal 19/13, arising out of judgment and order dated 14.12.2012 passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class, Bilaspur, District Bilaspur (C.G.) in Criminal Case No. 163 of 2011, convicting the revisionist under Sections 467/34 and 468/34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and sentencing him to undergo R.I. for 03 year with fine of Rs.500/- and R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs. 500/-, 2. The case of the prosecution in brief is that Ramayya Lal and Shastri have produced the Rin Pustika to obtain loan from Village Bharari Co-

operative, the Number of said Rin Pustika are 0272221 and 0268800. On being suspected of said Rin Pustika, Manager of Co-operative has sent those said Rin Pustika to the Patwari for enquiry. After enquiry Patwari has found that the said signatures and seal which were shown in Rin Pustika to be a Tahsildar and Patwari is forged and to be fabricated. the Khasra No. and Rakba No. of the Rin Pustika is false, said Khasra No. and Rakba No. are not mentioned in revenue record, after searching of the said Rin Pustika enquiry report was produced before the Tahsildar, Masturi by the Patwari. After receiving the enquiry report, the Tahsildar Masturi issued notice to the bearers of Rin Pustika to appear in the Court of Tahsildar. But, he was not present in the Tahsildar Court. Thereafter, Tahsildar Masturi made a report against the bearing of Rin Pustika, F.I.R was lodged under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. After completion of investigation, charge sheet was filed against Ramayya Lal, Komal, Shastri and Rajendra Prasad.

3. F.I.R was lodged against the accused persons who are the bearer of the Rin Pustika on 18.05.2009. After filing charge sheet charge was framed, prosecution adduced the witnesses, recorded the accused statements under Section 313. Thereafter, the learned trial Court acquitted accused No.1 and 2 namely Ramayya Lal and Shastri. the accused Komal and Rajendra Prasad were convicted, both accused filed appeal separately before the 4th Additional Session Judge of 1st Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur. After hearing both parties accused Komal was acquitted by the learned trial Court but convicted to the revisioner. Inadvertently the undersigned counsel had filed Criminal Appeal bearing No.457 of 2013 before this Hon'ble Court which has been withdrawn with liberty to take appropriate remedy under the law.

4. The learned trial Court recorded the evidence of prosecution witnesses and on the basis of which, found the applicant guilty for offences punishable under Sections 467/34 and 468/34 of the IPC and convicted him under the said Section and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 03 year with fine of Rs. 500/-, and R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs. 500/-, vide judgment dated 03.05.2013.

5. Feeling aggrieved by the said judgment dated 03.05.2013, the applicant preferred an appeal before the 4^th Additional Session Judge of 1^st Additional Session Judge, Bilaspur (C.G.), whereby the applicant was convicted and sentenced under Sections 467/34 and 468/34 of the IPC and convicted him under the said Section and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for 03 year with fine of Rs. 500/-, and R.I. for 03 years with fine of Rs. 500/-. Hence this revision.

6. At the outset, learned counsel for the revisionist does not