Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: procured document in 3. Title Of The Case : State vs S.P.Dua on 29 September, 2012Matching Fragments
13. The next aspect is in respect of bogus documents. The charge does not explain as to which bogus documents were used in registration of firm. However, it is clear from the record, testimony of PW2 Smt. Kamal Gera and PW3 Smt. Prakash Dua that the alleged bogus documents were procured through them. As per PW2 Smt. Kamal Gera, the accused made her sign one form on her request for registering the firm namely 'Royal Traders' with the Sales Tax Department. The accused made her sign another form on the pretext that the previous form on which she signed stood misplaced. After 24 years of the incident she received a notice from Sales Tax Department that her firm 'Pawan Enterprises' had stood as a surety to another firm 'Hind'. As she could find 'Hind' she deposited the surety amount. The above stated form was produced to the witness and same is Ex. PW 2/A. She testified that the said form was signed by her at point A and that she had also signed on the back page of the form which at that time was blank and the particulars were filled by the accused. In crossexamination the witness submits that she is literate and studied up to higher secondary and she can read and write and understand English. She is already having registration of a firm named 'Pawan Enterprises' and shall be therefore well versed with the formalities of such registration. The form Ex. PW 2/A bears the word 'Surety Bond', it bears the stamps by the name of Pawan Enterprises, Proprietor. It is not explained as to who affixed the stamps on Ex.PW 2/A. It is not explained as to whether the particulars on the front page of Ex.PW 2/A were duly filled when she signed on the said form. The witness does not say that the front page was blank. Interestingly, the text FIR No. 70 of 1994 State Vs S.P.Dua Page 9 of 12 which is written in hand on the front page of Ex. PW 2/A was not sent for any handwriting examination with the view to obtain opinion that the accused had written on it after obtaining signature of Smt. Kamal Gera. Therefore, the production of form Ex. PW 2/A does not prove anything against the accused.