Procedural irregularities in criminal trials can result in quashing convictions if fair trial principles are violated.

1. On being aggrieved by the judgment and order of the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge Ahmedabad delivered on 19-10-1981 in Criminal Appeal No. 178/80 upholding the order of conviction for the offences punishable u / S.409, S.420, S.468 and S.471 of the I.P.C. passed by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate Ahmedabad in Criminal Case No. 4066/80 dated 18-7-1980, the petitioner accused has challenged the impugned conviction order in this criminal revision application.

2. According to the prosecution, two accused namely Shri Arvind Balshankar Joshi Accused No. 1 and Shri Jayantilal Ambalal Trivedi Accused No. 2 were chargesheeted and prosecuted in the court of the learned Metropolitan Magistrate, Ahmedabad for the offences alleged to have been committed u / S.120(B),409, 420, 466, 468 and 471 of the I.P. Code. On appreciation of the prosecution evidence, the learned Metropolitan Magistrate acquitted the original accused No. 2 Shri Jayantilal Ambalal Trivedi but accused No. 1 petitioner has been held liable for the alleged offences and he has been convicted and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/-, in default of payment of fine to stiffer further rigorous imprisonment for one month for the offence punishable u / S.409,420 and 471 of the I.P.C. and further to suffer rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine, to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for the offence punishable u/S. 468 of the I.P.C. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate by his judgment and order dated 18-7-1980. However no offence punishable u / S.120(B) and S.466 of the I.P.C. is held to be proved against the accused. No appeal against the acquittal of accused No. 2 has been filed by the State.

3. Against the order of conviction, accused No. 1 petitioner had filed an appeal being Criminal Appeal No. 178/80 in the Court of the Addl. City Sessions Judge. Said appeal came to be partly allowed setting aside the conviction of the accused No. 1 petitioner for the offence punishable u/S. 468 of the I.P. Code and confirming the conviction for the offences punishable u / S.409, S.420 and S.471 of the I.P. Code by the learned Addl. City Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad by his impugned judgment and order dated I 9-10-1981.

4. The prosecution case, in short, is that during the year 1976-77, accused No. 1 Shri Arvind Balashankar Joshi and accused No. 2 Shri Jayantilal Ambalal Trivedi were serving in the office of the Inspector General of Registrar, Gujarat State, at Ahmedabad as Account clerk and Personal Asstt. To Inspector General of Registrar respectively. According to the prosecution, during this period, a system of supplying photo - stat copies to the offices of the District Sub-Registrars in the State, was introduced and for keeping photostat copies in well - preserved and safe condition, it was decided to provide iron (tin) boxes to the respective offices of District Sub-Registrars. Accordingly an order was placed to M/s. H. K. and Brothers, Ahmedabad for supplying 500 tin boxes by the Inspector General of Registrar on 30-10-1976 (Exh. 18). Pursuant to the order Exh. 18, 500 tin boxes were supplied by M/s. H. K. and Brothers to the different offices of the District Sub-Registrars and a bill (Exh. 6) for Rs. 9282-00 was forwarded to the office of the Inspector General of Registrar, Ahmedabad by M/s. H. K. and Brothers on 23-12-1976 for the payment against the price of 500 tin boxes. It is the prosecution case that the accused No. 1 be