Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: false marksheet in State vs Chandan Kumar on 31 May, 2022Matching Fragments
Witness Identification Description
exhibiting
PW1 Dr. Sanjay Mark 1/1 Experience certificate at MCI of Dr.
Sanjay
Ex.PW1/A Letter dt. 14.02.2013 to SHO by MCI
Ex.PW1/B copy of 0+2 Marksheet of accused
Chandan Kumar
Mark PW1/C Letter dt. 16.01.2012 of 10+2
marksheet of accused being false
Ex.PW1/D MCI Letter dt. 07.12.2011
Ex.PW1/E MCI letter dt. 14.02.2013 to accused
regarding rejection of request for
permanent registration due to negative
verification report from Council,
Ranchi of his 10+2 marksheet
Ex.PW1/F(OSR) Copy of application form for
permanent registration in respect of
accused
PW2 Eugene Minj Mark C-1 Letter dt. 05.06.2013 from MCI to
JIEC, Ranchi
Ex.PW2/A Letter dt. 16.07.2012 from MCI to
JIEC, Ranchi
Ex.PW2/B Reply dt. 09.07.2013 by JIEC, Ranchi
Ex.PW2/C Letter dt. 03.11.2014 from JIEC,
Ranchi to IS/ASI Birender Singh
PW3 SI Ram Pal Ex.PW3/A Seizure memo
PW4 ASI Birender Mark A and B Notice issued to Principal, Ranchi
Singh College, Jharkhand and JIEC, Ranchi
FIR No.98 of 2013; P.S. Palam Village Pages 3 of 12 State v. Chandan Kumar
Ex.PW4/A Notice to Section Officer Registration
MCI
Mark C and D Replies from JIEC, Ranchi
Ex.PW4/B Marksheet, 2002 with MS No. 004490
from JIEC, Ranchi
Mark E Reply Principal of Sindri College,
Sindri
PW5 ASI Harbans Ex.PW5/A Notice to Manager Bank of India
Lal MIDLBB New Friends Colony
Ex.PW5/B Notice to accused to join investigation
5 In order to prove its case, prosecution has examined seven witnesses
Findings 13 Now considering the merits of the case and established law, the prosecution in order to bring home the charge has to prove that the accused applied to the Medical Council of India for registration and in that process submitted fake/ false marksheet of 10+2. Prosecution also has to prove that accused had knowledge that the marksheet was not genuine, yet he used it as genuine and the said usage was with dishonest or fraudulent intention to cheat the Medical Council of India. It is no point in contention that Registration certificate be it provisional or permanent is a 'property' for the purposes of Section 420 Indian Penal Code [AIR 1969 SC 40]. It is also not a bone of contention that provisional certificate was delivered to accused and he even had applied for the permanent certificate.
21 From the discussion above, the accused is proved to have fraudulently induced the MCI to deliver his provisional registration, which if not for the deception of fake marksheet, the MCI would not have delivered. The accused has thus cheated the MCI by furnishing fake marksheet. Further, because of the said cheating, the MCI having been deceived has delivered the marksheet to the accused. Also, the accused had knowledge that the marksheet was false and yet he fraudulently and with dishonest intention used the same as genuine. It is true that not much effort was made to trace the person who forged the marksheet in question for the accused, however the same does not absolve the accused of his actions.
Conclusions FIR No.98 of 2013; P.S. Palam Village Pages 11 of 12 State v. Chandan Kumar 22 Thus the accused somehow had in his possession a false marksheet which he knew was not genuine. Accused used this fake marksheet to fill his form to the Medical Council of India and thereby got Provisional Registration Certificate. The accused has thus cheated and dishonestly induced the Medical Council of India (an artificial person) so deceived to delivery property i.e. Provisional Registration Certificate. All the ingredients of Section 420 of the Code are thus fulfilled. Similarly since accused knew or atleast had reason to believe that the marksheet was forged, yet he fraudulently or dishonestly used the same as genuine and thus the ingredients of Section 471 of the Code are also fulfilled.