Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

29. The Criminal Court on the basis of the offences alleged laid out the points for determination as eleven in number of which, the first nine alone are relevant for consideration. The first charge was with respect to the accused having committed a criminal conspiracy which was answered by the trial Court as "there is nothing in the prosecution evidence to hold that the accused had entered into a criminal conspiracy for committing the offence alleged against them"(sic). The other W.P.(C) No.3260 of 2010 - F charges were with respect to the offence of criminal breach of trust, cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, forgery of documents with intent to transfer valuable property and security and using such forged document as genuine. Offences were also alleged for dealing with and selling cement in violation of the Kerala Cement Distribution and Licensing Regulations 1975, and the Essential Commodities Act, 1955. The prosecution examined as many as 79 witnesses and marked P1 to P120 documents. The Court found that there was nothing to connect the accused with the alleged forgery of documents. The cement supplied was found to have been properly acknowledged by the G.C.D.A. It was categorically found that the allegation of misappropriation and diversion of cement was not proved. The transporting contractor, drivers and owners of the lorries and the persons alleged to have purchased the cement turned hostile. But it was not on account of that the accused were acquitted. Even before referring to the said witnesses the W.P.(C) No.3260 of 2010 - F Court found that the prosecution had not adduced any evidence to prove the conspiracy alleged and there was no evidence to prove the forgery of documents and also that the entire cement supplied was acknowledged by the G.C.D.A. After having dealt with the entire evidence, the specific finding in Ext.P2 was as follows :-