The court upheld the conviction under IPC Sections 465, 471, and 420, rejecting the unsubstantiated mental disorder defense.

O R D E R

The judgment rendered by the Additional Sessions Court (Adhoc)-II, Ernakulam in Crl.A No.587/2005 confirming the conviction and modifying the sentence awarded by the Judicial First Class Magistrate Court, Muvattupuzha in C.C No.1254/1998 is under challenge in this revision.

2. The case relates to the commission of offence under Sections 465 , 471 and 420 I.P.C by the petitioner herein. The allegation against him is that, while he was working as Veterinary Surgeon in the Government Veterinary Hospital, Mampad in Malappuram District, he forged an order to appear that he resigned from his post and that his resignation was accepted by the Director of Animal Husbandry Department with his charge handed over to another Veterinary Surgeon. The petitioner is also alleged to have forged the report of transfer of charge to enable him to join as Production Manager of Meat Products of India Limited, Koothattukulam. Making use of the above forged documents, the petitioner took charge of the above post and worked there from 10.04.1987 to 20.04.1987. Thus, the petitioner is alleged to have committed the aforesaid offences.

3. In the trial before the learned Magistrate, 18 witnesses were examined as PW1 to PW18 and 17 documents were brought on record as Exts.P1 to P17. After evaluating the aforesaid evidence, the learned Magistrate came to the finding that the petitioner committed the offences under Sections 465 , 471 and 420 I.P.C, and accordingly convicted him thereunder. He was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years under Section 420 I.P.C, and rigorous imprisonment for one year each under and 471 I.P.C. Though the petitioner challenged the aforesaid verdict of the learned Magistrate before the Sessions Court, Ernakulam, the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc)-II, Ernakulam who considered the appeal, declined to interfere with the finding of conviction of the learned Magistrate. However, the Appellate Court reduced the sentence of imprisonment under I.P.C, to simple imprisonment for one year, and the sentence of imprisonment awarded under and 471 I.P.C, to simple imprisonment for six months each, with the further direction that the aforesaid sentences shall run concurrently. It is aggrieved by the above verdict of the Appellate Court, that the petitioner is here before this Court with this revision.

5. Heard the learned counsel for the revision petitioner, and the learned Public Prosecutor representing the State of Kerala.

6. The prosecution relied on the evidence of the official witnesses of the Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Department and that of the Meat Products of India Limited towards establishing the charge of forgery and cheating attributed against the petitioner. That apart, the forged appointment order, joining report and the report of transfer of charge made use of by the petitioner for getting posted as Production Manager in the Meat Products of India Limited, Koothattukulam, were marked as Exts.P2 to P4 respectively. The Managing Director, Administration Manager and Supervisor of Meat Products of India Limited, Koothattukulam tendered evidence before the Trial Court by referring to Exts.P2 to P4 about the forgery and cheating committed by the petitioner. The evidence in the above regard stood corroborated by the evidence of PW5 to PW9, who were the officers of the Veterinary Hospital, Mampad and the officers of the Animal Husbandry Department, Malappuram. The Senior Accountant and Sub Treasury Officer of Sub Treasury, Nilambur tendered evidence as PW10 and PW11 about the salary and other emoluments drawn by the petitioner while he was working as the Veterinary Surgeon of Mampad. In addition to the above evidence, the Administrative Assistant of Meat Products of