Bangalore District Court
The State vs Narasimha Sath Pati on 16 January, 2023
KABC030372672016
Presented on : 15.06.2016
Registered on : 15.06.2016
Decided on : 16.01.2023
Duration : 06y/07m/01day
IN THE COURT OF
XLI ADDITIONAL METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
AT : BENGALURU
PRESIDED OVER BY TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA
B.A.,LL.B.,
XLI Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate
Bengaluru
Dated on this 16th day of January 2023
C.C.No.14087/2016
COMPLAINANT : The State
by Koramangala Police Station
-V/s-
ACCUSED : Narasimha Sath Pati
S/o. Niranjan,
Aged about 40 years,
R/at. No.25, 3rd Main,
7th B Cross, Hoysala Nagar,
Rama Murthy Nagar, Bengaluru.
Date of Commission of offence 05.08.2015
Date of report 30.01.2016
2 C.C.No.14087/2016
Date of arrest On 24.10.2016 the accused got
enlarged himself on bail.
Name of the complainant Smt.Amara Jyothi
Date of commencement of 09.06.2022
recording Evidence
Date of closing evidence 22.12.2022
Offences complained of U/Sec. 420, 468, 471 of IPC &
Sec.12[b] of Passports Act
Opinion of the Judge As per final orders
State Represented by Senior Asst. Public Prosecutor
Accused Represented by Sri. K. R. Ashoka., Advocate
JUDGMENT
[Delivered on 16.01.2023] The P.S.I of Koramangala Police Station has filed charge sheet against the accused for the offences punishable U/Sec.420, 468, 471 of IPC and Sec.12[b] of Passports Act.
2. Brief facts of prosecution case is as follows:
On 05.08.2015, the accused applied for passport in his name before the Regional Passport Office, Koramangala along with forged school transfer certificate as a genuine document dishonestly knowingly that, it is a false and fabricated document 3 C.C.No.14087/2016 and thereby dishonestly induced the office to obtain passport and thereby cheated the Government. On the basis of complaint given by the CW.1, the Koramangala Police have registered this case in Cr.No.34/2016.
3. After the investigation, the IO filed charge sheet against the accused. This Court has taken cognizance of the offences punishable U/Sec. 420, 468, 471 of IPC and Sec.12[b] of Passports Act.
4. By obtaining anticipatory bail from the Hon'ble sessions Court in Crl.Misc.No.921/2016, the accused appeared before this Court on 24.10.2016 through his counsel and got enlarged himself on bail. This Court complied with Sec.207 of Cr.P.C and furnished charge sheet copy to the accused.
5. This Court heard both the parties. As there were no grounds to discharge the accused, this Court framed charges for the offences punishable U/Sec. U/Sec.420, 468, 471 of IPC and 4 C.C.No.14087/2016 Sec.12[B] of Passports Act. The accused did not plead guilty. He claimed to be tried.
6. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined one witness as PW.1 and got marked Ex.P.1 to 6 documents. With this, the prosecution closed its side of evidence. The accused got marked Ex.D.1 and 2 documents. Thereafter, the statement of the accused U/Sec.313 of Cr.P.C was recorded. The accused denied the incriminating evidence adduced against him. He did not chose to lead his defense evidence.
7. I have heard the arguments of Senior APP and Sri. KRA Advocate.
8. On the basis of the allegations made against the accused, the following points arise for my consideration:
1. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on 05.08.2015, the accused in order to obtain Indian passport submitted an online 5 C.C.No.14087/2016 application to Regional Passport Office, Koramangala along with forged school transfer certificate dishonestly and cheated the Government and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.420 of IPC?
2. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused forged school transfer certificate for the purpose for the purpose of obtaining passport and thereby he has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.468 of IPC?
3. Whether the prosecution proves beyond reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused dishonestly produced forged document as genuine document at passport office knowing fully well that it is a forged document and and thereby he 6 C.C.No.14087/2016 has committed the offence punishable U/Sec.471 of IPC?
4. Whether the prosecution proves beyond all reasonable doubt that, on the aforesaid date, time and place, the accused knowingly furnished false document to obtain passport and thereby committed an offence punishable U/Sec.12[b] of passports Act?
5. What order?
9. My answers to the above points are as under:
Point No.1 : In Negative
Point No.2 : In Negative
Point No.3 : In Negative
Point No.4 : In Negative
Point No.5 : As per final orders for the following:
REASONS
Point No.1 to 4: As all these points are interrelated, I take all the four points together for common discussion to avoid repetition.
10. The burden is casted on the prosecution to prove that, the accused forged school transfer certificate and dishonestly 7 C.C.No.14087/2016 submitted the same to Regional Passport Office, Koramangala for the purpose of obtaining Indian passport and fraudulently used that document as genuine document which he knows that, it is forged document and thereby he has cheated the Government and thereby committed the offences punishable U/Sec. 420, 468, 471 of IPC and U/Sec.12[b] of Passports Act.
11. In order to prove its case, the prosecution got examined the complainant CW.1 as PW.1 and got marked complaint as Ex.P.1, letter of CW.2 as Ex.P.2, copy of online passport application as Ex.P.3, copy of school transfer certificate as Ex.P.4, copy of reply given by I/c. head master as Ex.P.5 and covering letter as Ex.P.6. The accused got marked closure of the file of passport application as Ex.D.1 and postal cover as Ex.D.2.
12. CW.1/PW.1- Smt.Amara Jyothi in her evidence has stated that, in the year 2015 when she was working as Asst. passport officer, a person by name Narasimha Satpati S/o. Niranjan 8 C.C.No.14087/2016 Satpati had submitted application to obtain passport. On verification of his application, the school transfer certificate appeared suspicious. In order to ascertain the genuineness of that document, she sent the same to the head master of Jai Maa Durga high school, Baad Basul, Kalahandi district, Orissa. On verification of the documents, the head master sent reply that, the school transfer certificate is false document. Hence, she gave Ex.P.1 complaint to Koramangala police. Along with the complaint, she sent the copies of online application, school transfer certificate, letter sent to Jai Maa Durga high School, election identity card, receipt towards the purchase of HP gas cylinder, customers book and the original letter given by Jai Maa Durga high School. The original letter given by the school authority is marked as Ex.P.2, copy of online application is marked as Ex.P.3, copy of school transfer certificate is marked as 9 C.C.No.14087/2016 Ex.P.4, copy of the letter sent by Jai Maa Durga school is marked as Ex.P.5.
13. In order hold the accused guilty of the offences alleged against him, the prosecution has to prove that, the accused has made or created or forged document i.e., school transfer certificate/Ex.P.4 with an intention to obtain Indian passport and dishonestly furnished the same to Regional Passport Office and thereby cheated the Government.
14. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has to prove that, the accused himself fabricated or created the document and submitted the same to passport office. As per Sec.15 of Passports Act- No prosecution shall be instituted against any person in respect of any offence under this Act without the previous sanction of the central Government or such officer or authority as may be authorized by that Government by order in writing in this behalf. In the present case, no such sanction was obtained by 10 C.C.No.14087/2016 CW.1/PW.1 to lodge complaint. The CW.3 being the IO has not obtained sanction from the Government or authority to register the case and file charge sheet.
15. It appears that, Sec.420, 468 and 471 of IPC are inserted in the charge sheet in order to overcome the restriction of obtaining previous sanction. In order to take action against the accused U/Sec.12 of Passport act, the PW.1 ought to have taken prior sanction from the Government. The CW.3 being the investigating officer ought to have sought sanction from the Government for prosecuting the accused. But no such sanction is taken by the IO or the complainant.
16. While submitting the charge sheet, the IO did not even care to look into the record to see whether any sanction is obtained from the Government or not to prosecute the accused. There is no reference in Ex.P.3, what are the documents annexed to the application. The IO has not seized the original of Ex.P.4. Except 11 C.C.No.14087/2016 the copy of so-called forged school transfer certificate, no believable document is produced before the Court to say that, it is a fabricated or forged document.
17. In spite of issuance of repeated summons, warrants and proclamations against the CW.2 and 3, the prosecution has not secured their presence. Moreover this case is of the year 2016. By considering the age of the case, this Court dropped CW.2 and 3 from examination. The CW.3 being the investigating officer has not seized the so-called forged, fabricated document of original of Ex.P.4 to ascertain the correctness of Ex.P.1 complaint given by PW.1. There is no document on record to say that, the CW.3 has verified the documents available with the accused and the documents available at the office of PW.1. Hence, a question arises in the mind of the Court as to what was the basis for CW.3 to file charge sheet against the accused.
12 C.C.No.14087/2016
18. The IO ought to have seized the documents from the accused by drawing mahazer. But, the IO did not make any effort to collect such documents. In the absence of such documents, it cannot be accepted that, the contents of Ex.P.1 are true and correct. It appears that, the CW.3/IO has filed charge sheet against the accused only on the basis of Ex.P2 and 5. The IO has not cared to collect the original of Ex.P.4. Hence, it cannot be accepted that, the accused himself uploaded Ex.P.3 along with Ex.P.4.
19. In the present case, the IO has not seized any documents by drawing mahazar by visiting the house of the accused or at the Regional passport office. He has not enquired with any witnesses nor recorded their statements, who are attached to passport office. The CW.3 being the IO has not recorded the statement of CW.2. Hence, it appears that, the IO has not investigated the matter effectively.
13 C.C.No.14087/2016
20. Likewise, there is no material on record to hold that, that the accused himself is the maker of Ex.P.4. Charge of forgery cannot be imposed on a person, who is not the maker of the false document in question. Making of a document is different than causing it to be made. There is no evidence on record to hold that, the accused furnished false document/Ex.P.4 to obtain Indian passport.
21. In Ex.P.5 letter, it is stated that " Number of admission register 221/315 and date on which he left the school -03.09.2010 mentioned in the transfer certificate is totally false. The said certificate issued on 03.09.2010 in the seal and signature of head master, jai Maa Durga High school, Badbasul, Kalahandi does not relates to this school and it is totally false and fabricated as there is no such record available in this institution in this regard". But, the IO did no collect the original of Ex.P.5 from the Regional 14 C.C.No.14087/2016 Passport Office, Koramangala so as to say that, it was received from Jai Maa Durga School.
22. Ex.P.2 is the reply said to be given by in charge head master to CW.3, wherein it is stated that, " I know nothing about it. The TC is totally false & fabricated as there is no such record available in this institution in this regard". The author of Ex.P.2 did not come forward to give evidence. The PW.1 did not hand over the original of Ex.P.5 to the IO.
23. During the course of cross examination, the PW.1 was confronted with a letter issued by passport office, Koramangala, which is marked as Ex.D.1. The envelop through which, Ex.D.1 letter was sent is marked as Ex.D.2. The PW.1 admits that, she is aware of the contents of Ex.D.1. In order to appreciate the evidence, it is necessary to note the contents of Ex.D.1 dated:
28.01.2016. In Ex.D.1 there is a recital stating that " the passport application is pending in this office in respect of Sri.Narasimha 15 C.C.No.14087/2016 Satpathi. In the absence of any response from your side till date, your file has been closed and appropriate notice has also been placed on the website www.passportindia.gov.in in the section "track status" against your file number. You may however, wish to apply for fresh passport with all the documents and required fees anytime at the passport seva Kendra near your place".
24. In this letter, the file number of the accused is mentioned as BN2068723954915. In Ex.P.1 complaint also, same file No. BN2068723954915 is mentioned. Ex.P.1 was lodged on 22.01.2016. The passport office issued Ex.D.1 on 28.01.2016. If the file of the accused was closed on 28.01.2016 as per Ex.D.1, why the PW.1 did not inform the same to IO? Why the investigating agency proceeded with the investigation of this case? These questions remained unanswered.
25. Ex.P.5 letter is dated: 08.10.2015. According to PW.1, generally they take necessary legal action within 15 to 30days 16 C.C.No.14087/2016 from the date when they learn that the applicant has furnished false and fabricated documents. As stated by PW.1, if Ex.P.5 letter was received in the month of October 2015, why necessary legal action was not taken immediately against the accused? Why he was issued with Ex.D.1 letter after lodging Ex.P.1 complaint? These questions remained unanswered. Moreover, the PW.1 did not handover the original of Ex.P.5 to the IO.
26. The CW.2 being an IO did not call upon the accused to produce all original documents, which he possessed with him. Hence, it cannot be accepted that, the accused himself forwarded Ex.P.4 along with Ex.P.3 application. If we read the evidence of PW.1 in comparison with documentary evidence, then it appears that, there is no evidence on record to hold that, the accused has fabricated, created document/Ex.P.4 and furnished the same to Regional Passport office dishonestly by giving false information to obtain passport and thereby cheated the Government. There is 17 C.C.No.14087/2016 no cogent evidence to link the accused with alleged crime and Ex.P.4.
27. The prosecution has not produced any corroborative evidence to substantiate the oral evidence of PW.1. Hence, the evidence of PW.1 is not helpful to the prosecution to prove the charges leveled against the accused. In order to say that, the accused has dishonestly forged document and cheated the Government by furnishing false, fabricated document to passport authority, the IO has not seized the original of such false document from the accused.
28. There is no reference of list of enclosure on Ex.P.3 application, so as to say that it was accompanied by Ex.P.4 document. There is no believable evidence on record to say that, Ex.P.3 and 4 were furnished by the accused. The IO did not investigate the matter to know from which IP address Ex.P.3 18 C.C.No.14087/2016 application was submitted. Hence, the allegations made against the accused appears to be baseless.
29. In these circumstances, the evidence of PW.1 is not helpful to the case of the prosecution. From the evidence of PW.1, the charges leveled against the accused are not proved. Thus, the prosecution has failed beyond all reasonable doubt that, the accused has committed the offences alleged against him. In such circumstances, I answer the point No.1 to 4 in the Negative. Point No.5: For the aforesaid reasons I proceed to pass the following:
ORDER By exercising the powers conferred U/Sec.248[1] of Cr.P.C., the accused is acquitted from the charges of Sec. 420, 468, 471 of IPC and Sec.12[b] of Passports Act.
The bail bonds executed by the accused stands cancelled.
16.01.2023 [TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA] XLI ADDL.METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE BENGALURU 19 C.C.No.14087/2016 ANNEXURE LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
PW.1 : Smt.Amara Jyothi LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE PROSECUTION:
Ex.P.1 : Complaint Ex.P.1[a] : Signature of PW.1 Ex.P.2 : Copy of transfer certificate Ex.P.3 : Copy of Online application Ex.P.4 : Copy of School transfer certificate Ex.P.5 : letter written to school Head Master Ex.P.6 : letter written by passport officer Ex.P.6[a] : Signature of PW.3
LIST OF WITNESSES EXAMINED FOR THE ACCUSED :
NIL LIST OF DOCUMENTS MARKED FOR THE ACCUSED :
Ex.D.1 : Letter of passport office Ex.D.2 : Postal cover ....................................................................................
Dictated on : 12.01.2023
Transcribed on : 13.01.2023
checked on : 16.01.2023
Signed on : 16.01.2023
[TATTANDA DAMAYANTI SOMAYYA]
XLI ADDL.METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
BENGALURU
Visit ecourts.gov.in for updates or download mobile app "eCourts Services" from Android or iOS