Tripura High Court
Sri Arup Ratan Paul vs The State Of Tripura on 30 May, 2017
Author: S. Talapatra
Bench: S. Talapatra
IN THE HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
CRL. REV. P. NO.59 OF 2010
Sri Arup Ratan Paul,
son of Sri Ramesh Paul,
P.O. & vill: Debdaru, P.S. Baikhora,
via- Jolaibari, South Tripura
..................... Petitioner
- Vs -
The State of Tripura,
represented by the Secretary,
Department of Home,
Government of Tripura, Agartala
...............Respondent
BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. TALAPATRA For the petitioner : Mr. D.C. Roy, Advocate For the respondent : Mr. R.C. Debnath, Addl. P.P. Date of hearing : 12.04.2017 Date of judgment & order: 30.05.2017 Yes No Whether fit for reporting :
√ JUDGMENT & ORDER By means of this criminal revision petition filed under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., the judgment and order dated 09.07.2010 delivered in Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2010 has been questioned inasmuch as the said judgment of conviction dated 20.02.2010 and the consequential order of CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 1 of 14 sentence dated 20.02.2010 delivered in G.R. 248 of 2005 delivered by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Belonia have been affirmed by the said judgment. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 473 and 474 of IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for 3(three) years and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 5(five) months for each of the offences as stated.
02. On 14.12.2005, one Sub-Inspector of Police namely Mohitosh Majumder of Baikhora police station, in the course of his mobile duty along with the other staffs received an information that one Arup Ratan Paul [the petitioner herein] had been dealing in forged certificates. On the tip of that information, the said Sub- Inspector of Police [PW-1] raided the house of the petitioner and seized several fake citizenship certificates, school transfer certificate and death certificates.
03. PW-1 lodged a complaint and based on which Baikhora P.S. Case No.58 of 2005 was registered under Section 468 of the IPC. The case was investigated by another Sub-Inspector of Police namely Swapan Sarkar [PW-18]. The said Investigating Officer also seized 13(thirteen) rubber stamps having designation of Sub- Divisional Magistrate, Belonia and of other public authorities, blank transfer certificate forms, blank citizenship certificate forms, CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 2 of 14 blank caste and tribe certificates and other documents from the rented house of the petitioner at Kalinagar.
04. On completion of the investigation the final police report was filed chargesheeting the petitioner under Section 468, 471, 472 and 473 of the IPC. Thereafter, the charge against the petitioner was framed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, South Tripura, Belonia under Section 468, 471, 467, 473 and 474 of the IPC separately, but to each of the charges the petitioner pleaded innocence and claimed to face the trial.
05. In order to substantiate the charge as many as 18 witnesses [PWs.1-18] and a good number of documentary evidence [Exbt.1-8] were introduced in the evidence. After the prosecution evidence was recorded, the petitioner was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C. and thereafter by the judgment dated 20.02.2010 the petitioner has been convicted under Section 473 and 474 of the IPC and sentenced as stated.
06. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 20.02.2010, the petitioner had preferred an appeal under Section 374(3) of the Cr.P.C. in the court of the Addl. Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia being Criminal Appeal No.07 of 2010. The said appeal has been dismissed by the impugned judgment by holding that possession of the seized document has been proved beyond reasonable CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 3 of 14 doubt. The commission of offence under Section 473 and 474 has been well proved and hence without any interference even in the sentence, the appeal was dismissed.
07. Mr. D.C. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has quite strenuously argued that investigation was motivated and there was serious violation of Section 102 and 165 of the Cr.P.C. Before taking this court to the records of evidence, Mr. Roy, learned counsel has submitted that the statute has saddled an uncompromising duty on the Officer-in-Charge of a police station or a police officer conducting an investigation when he has reasonable grounds for believing that anything necessary for the purpose of an investigation into any offence which he is authorised to investigate may be found in any place within the limits of the police station of which he is in charge, or to which he is attached, and that such thing cannot in his opinion be otherwise obtained without undue delay, such officer may, after recording in writing the grounds of his belief and specifying in such writing, so far as possible, the thing for which search is to be made, search, or cause search to be made, for such thing in any place within the limits of such station. The latter part of Section 165 of the Cr.P.C. is elaborate description for causing further search.
CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 4 of 14
08. Mr. D.C. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has further submitted that no such record has been produced before the trial. Therefore it has to be assumed that there is a serious violation in carrying out the search which was caused in respect of the petitioner's involvement in commission off those offences. In this regard, this court should observe that even if the search is illegal, that will not vitiate the seizure and the further investigation. This is the law as enunciated by the apex court in State of Maharashtra vs. Natwarlal reported in AIR 1980 SC 593.
09. Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner therefore has submitted that even the seizure which was caused by PW-1 or by PW-2 has not been done in terms of Section 102 of the Cr.P.C. Moreover, from the seizure list it would be apparent that one Samir Patari and Bidhan Banik respectively, PW-5 and PW-4 were seizure witnesses.
10. PW-4, Bidhan Banik in his statement in the trial has stated that the Police Officer seized those fake certificates from him and he for the first time came to know that certificate was fake one. But he paid the petitioner Rs.1200/- for collecting the citizenship certificate. The citizenship certificate which was handed over to his wife was without any signature of the citizen. He put his signature there. Similarly, PW-5, Samir Patary has CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 5 of 14 stated that one citizenship certificate had been seized from him [Exbt.5].
11. PW-1, Mohitosh Majumder has reiterated in the trial that on receipt of information he searched the accused's residence and seized the forged certificates by preparing the seizure list [Exbt.1]. He has identified the seizure list and submitted that in presence of one independent witness namely Bimal Pal and one of the Assistant Sub-Inspector of his police station he seized this material. PW-3, Bimal Pal came to depose in the trial but he turned hostile to the prosecution case and hence he was cross- examined by the prosecution.
12. PW-2, Pradip Biswas, the Assistant Sub-Inspector of Police has deposed in the trial and identified the seizure list and the seized materials [MO1 series].
13. According to Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner when the independent witness turned hostile the evidence of a Police Officer who was the part of the search can hardly be relied upon.
14. One Janardhan Banik, PW-6 deposed in the trial and stated that on payment of Rs.400/- the petitioner delivered up him the citizenship certificate where the date was wrongly written. The petitioner corrected that certificate and thereafter returned the corrected certificate. That certificate was seized by CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 6 of 14 the Police Officer [PW-18] from this shop and he identified that certificate and the signature on the seizure list [Exbt.6].
15. PW-7, Manik Lal Sarkar has stated that one day in the evening, one police officer came to his shop. At that time, someone had produced one citizenship certificate, the police officer seized that certificate. He was the witness to the seizure and in acknowledgment he signed on the seizure list. He identified his signature on Exbt-6 as well as identified the seized materials (MO1) in the trial.
16. PW-8, Bimalendu Chakraborty was working as the Assistant Head Master in Debdaru High School. He has categorically stated that:
"About 2 years back one day daroga babu came to my school and also showed to me these 3 certificates and on perusal of these 3 transfer certificate and after consultation with my relevant school register I have found I have issued only one transfer certificate in favour of Papu Majumder S/O-Dilip Majumder, but the other 2 TC were fake one. At that time daroga babu also stated to me from whose possession these seized forged certificate, but at this stage I cannot recollect the same."
17. One Sanjit Majumder, PW-9 was working as Assistant Teacher in West Kalabaria S.B. School has also deposed and stated that on 15.02.2006 one Police Officer came to their school and showed him 3(three) transfer certificates and also the signature of the Headmaster of the school, but after consultation CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 7 of 14 with the relevant registers it is found that no such certificates were issued from their school in the name of (1) Pabitra Tripura, S/O-Monijoy Tripura (2) Halafru Mog, S/O-Afru Mog (3) Kartik Dey, S/O-Monindra Kr. Dey (4) Sankar Dey, S/O Mantu Kr. Dey (5) Dipak Pal, S/O- Nani Gopal Pal and (6) Rabindra Tripura, S/O- Ramani Tripura. On perusal of the documents it appeared to him that the signature of the Headmaster, Dilip Kumar Biswas was forged one. On being asked the Police Officer stated him that he recovered those certificates from the possession of Arup Ratan Pal of Debdaru.
18. Anil Chandra Bhowmik, PW-10 was working as the Headmaster in North Belonia High School has stated that on 15.12.2006, the Police Officer came to him and showed him three transfer certificates issued from that school in the name of (1) Abhijit Das, S/O-Bhajan Das (2) Sujit Nama, S/O-Khater Mohan Nama and (3) Abhijit Das, S/O-Bhajan Das. On consultation with the relevant Transfer register, he found that none of those certificates was issued from that school under his sign and signature. All those three certificates were fake. On being asked, the Police Officer told him that those documents were seized form one Arup Ratan Paul of Debdaru.
19. PW-11, Gopal Debnath has narrated how the petitioner assured him that he would arrange the citizenship CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 8 of 14 certificate. However he has stated that he did not pay him any money.
20. PW-12, Swapan Choudhury who was working as a daily rated worker in the Agricultural Department has stated that he was asked by the Police Officer to put a signature on a paper. For such statement he was declared hostile by the prosecution and he did not state anything which would be relevant for unearthing the truth.
21. PW-13, Gopal Chandra Das followed the same suit.
22. PW-14, Badal Majumder has stated that petitioner met with him at Bikhora market and assured that he can obtain a citizenship certificate in consideration of Rs.500/-. He gave him photograph and other documents for obtaining citizenship certificate for him from the concerned office. After 5/6 months, the petitioner informed him that the citizenship certificate has been obtained, he might collect that but since he could not arrange money, no delivery was caused. One Police Officer met him and asked whether he had engaged Arup Ratan Paul, the petitioner who obtained a citizenship certificate. PW-14 had clearly admitted of the instruction for obtaining a citizenship certificate. In cross-examination, nothing could be extracted from this witness.
CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 9 of 14
23. PW-15, Raj Kumar Biswas has stated that he engaged Arup Ratan Paul to procure the citizenship certificate for his three sons and one daughter. He asked for two copies photographs of each of his sons and daughter and some other documents. Accordingly, he supplied the petitioner various documents and photographs. He initially paid Rs.200/- and assured that he will pay 600/- more. One day the petitioner informed him that the citizenship certificates were ready for delivery, but since he had no money he did not go to collect those. In the cross- examination, he did not reveal anything material.
24. One vital witness, Dulal Chandra Das, PW-16 who was at the relevant point of time, working as S.D.M Belonia, South Tripura has deposed that he received one letter dated 06.02.2006 whereby the Investigating Officer requested him to verify the genuineness of 13 Nos. of B.B.C., 2 Nos. of S.C. and 2 Nos. of O.B.C. certificates. After verification it was found that all these certificates were fake and no such certificate had ever been issued from the office of the S.D.M., Belonia, South Tripura. He identified the letter written by the Baikhora Police Station. He has stated in the trial as under:
"I have also sent all the said 15 Nos. of fake certificates along with my latter. During inspection on perusal of the certificates as well as my official record it is found that the certificates of Dipak Paul, Sankar Bhowmik, Ajit Biswas, Tathish Das, Nupur Das, Gita Das, Lalit Majumder, Biswajit Biswas, Sipra Biswas(Baidya), Pappu Majumder, Ranjit Biswas, Badal Majumder, Janardhan Banik, CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 10 of 14 Bidhan Banik, Ratan Debnath, Bidhan Banik and Janardhan Banik were not issued by me and in all these documents the signatures of mine were fake one."
He has submitted that the signature of his predecessor was also forged and those certificates were fake. But he has in the cross-examination stated that no specimen signature was obtained from him by the Investigating Officer.
25. Shyamaprasad Biswas, PW-17 has stated that he took up the investigation from one Swapan Sarkar [PW-18] and he completed the investigation. During investigation he had verified some documents of West Kalabaria School. Those documents were produced by one Teacher namely Sanjib Majumder. On 15.02.2006, he verified some more documents produced by Anil Chandra Bhowmik, the Head Master of North Belonia High School. On 31.05.2006, he filed a prayer to SDPO, Belonia to verify citizenship certificates and during verification those were found fake. The S.D.M., Belonia submitted the report stating that those citizenship certificates were fake. During investigation, he examined some more witnesses namely Upendra Kr. Reang, Bimalendu Chakraborty and Anil Ch. Bhowmik and recorded their statement under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. He has not stated anything more in respect of his investigation.
26. Swapan Sarkar, PW-18 has investigated the case and he has given a narration how he conducted the investigation CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 11 of 14 having received the suo motu complaint from PW-1. He had carried out the investigation for purpose of verification of the seized documents. He has handed over the case docket as per the direction of the Officer-in-Charge to PW-17.
27. Mr. Roy, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has submitted that there is a serious defect in the process of proving the seizure, apart from the procedure of search. Moreover, the report on verification of the alleged fake documents is also not reliable as no scientific examination was carried out and finally he has submitted that when the seizure is under serious cloud the petitioner is entitled to get the benefit of doubt.
28. From the other side, Mr. R.C. Debnath, Addl. P.P. appearing for the state has submitted that against the concurrent finding of fact, the petition for revision should not be used to further appreciation of the evidence unless there is manifest illegality committed at the time of appreciation. This court may not embark on a fresh appreciation of the evidence. Moreover, even if the evidence is appreciated, it would be apparent that the persons or the authority whose signature was forged, they came to the trial and deposed without any ambivalence that though apparently the signatures appear to be of theirs, but they did not put such signature and they did not issue any such certificate from the school or the office. According to Mr. Debnath, learned CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 12 of 14 Addl. P.P., the person who signs over any document is the best person to say whether that signature as put on the forged document is of his or not. The scientific examination apart, the value of this kind of evidence has always been recognized by the courts. Therefore, there is no defect in the investigation and appreciation of the evidence as carried out by the trial court as well as by the first appellate court. The impugned judgment does not suffer from any infirmity.
29. On appreciation of submissions of the learned counsel for the parties, on scrutiny of the records and having due regard to the provisions of law particularly Section 473 and 474 IPC, this court is of the view that ingredients of Section 473 as well as Section 474 have quite satisfactorily been established by the prosecution beyond reasonable doubt. This court has received assurance further. While the petitioner was examined under Section 313 of the Cr.P.C., he did not give any explanation how those forged/fake documents came to his possession. This special knowledge was only with the petitioner but he failed on the face of such emerging evidence to discharge his burden under Section 106 of the Evidence Act. Therefore, this court does not find any reason to interfere with the impugned judgment and order.
30. Having held so, this criminal revision petition stands dismissed. The petitioner is directed to serve out the sentence. CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 13 of 14 The petitioner is directed to surrender within 1(one) month from today before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Belonia, South Tripura. If the petitioner does not so surrender in terms of this order the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Belonia, South Tripura shall take all coercive action to bring the petitioner to suffer the sentence.
Send down the LCRs forthwith.
JUDGE Moumita CRL REV P 59 of 2010 Page 14 of 14