for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 468 IPC. Further he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.200/- for the commission of an offence punishable under Section 471 IPC. In default of making payment of fine, convict shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month.

2. The brief allegations of the prosecution case are that on 13.01.2004, Subhash Chander SI from CID Crime Branch, Hisar along with his police team was present at Bus Stand, Charkhi Dadri, in connection with crime investigation duty, then a secret information was received by the police party to the effect that one Raj Kumar son of Ram Singh, resident of Loharu Road, Charkhi Dadri was belonging to General Caste and he had got prepared a forged Scheduled Caste Certificate from the S.D.O. (Civil), Charkhi Dadri. On the basis of the said certificate of Schedule Caste, accused Raj Kumar has got the appointment of the post of DPE from the Education Board, Haryana Chandigarh in a Secondary School, which was reserved for SC-B category. The accused had joined the post of D.P.E. in Government Secondary School, Kesari (Ambala) on 09.12.2003 on the basis of the forged certificate. Thereafter, necessary documents were collected during the course of investigation. On the basis of aforesaid information, a formal FIR was registered.

3. After the presentation of challan, the petitioner was charge-sheeted for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 of IPC, to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. In order to prove its case, examined Kamlesh as PW1, Gian Singh EHC as PW2, Rajbir Singh as PW3, Ram Singh Patwari as PW4, Kanwar Singh Inspector as PW5, Satbir Singh Inspector as PW6, Vijay Kumar son of Ram Kishan as PW7, Sukheshhan Sharma, Lecturer as PW8, Sushila Dhillo, Principal as PW9, Constable Firoz Khan as PW10, Matu Ram son of Kishan Lal as PW11, Satpal Assistant as PW12, Kirori Lal, Sub Inspector as PW13, Sajjan Singh, Retired Patwari as PW14, Chhanno Devi wife of Ram Singh as PW15 and Hari Ram son of Ami Lal as PW16. Thereafter, evidence of the prosecution was closed.

5. After closure of the evidence, the statement of the petitioner was recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and he denied all the incriminating evidence put to him and stated that he has been falsely involved in the present case. No evidence was led in defence.

6. At the very outset, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he does not wish to challenge the judgement of conviction passed against the petitioner by the trial Court, however, some leniency may be shown while awarding the sentence to him. Even though, learned counsel for the petitioner has not challenged the judgements of conviction, still, this Court has considered the case on merits.

7. Learned State counsel submits that the petitioner does not deserve the concession regarding sentence and the present revision petition be dismissed.

8. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record carefully.

9. In order to prove the charge, the prosecution examined PW1, Kamlesh, who did not support the case of the prosecution. PW2, Gian Singh, EHC, proved the recovery memo Ex. PW2/A and disclosure statement Ex. PW2/B. Still further, PW3 Satbir, proved the register Ex. PW3/A, which was handed over by him to the police from the SDM office. PW4 Ram Singh, Patwari, had proved the recovery memo Ex. PW4/B and his report Ex. PW4/C. PW5 Kanwar Singh proved the recovery memo Ex. PW3/B, vide which SC certificate was taken in possession. PW6 Inspector Satbir Singh proved the recovery memo Ex. PW6/B, vide which the concerned record Mark A to I was taken into possession. PW7 Vijay Kumar proved recovery memo Ex.PW7/A vide which mark X was taken into police possession. He admitted that mark X and recovery memo Ex.PW7/A are of the same date. PW8 Subhekshan Sharma, Lecturer deposed regarding recovery memo Ex.PW6/B. PW9 Sushila Dhillo, Pri