THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1507 of 2007 24-12-2014 BETWEEN:
Kadapa District Marata Mandali, Kadapa, Rep. by its President …..Appellant AND K.Radha Krishna Rao & another …..Respondents THIS COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING ORDER:
THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE RAJA ELANGO CRIMINAL APPEAL No.1507 of 2007 JUDGMENT:
This Criminal Appeal is filed by the complainant challenging the judgment dated 9.07.2007 on the file of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Kadapa in C.C.No.245 of 2001 whereby the learned Magistrate found the first respondent- sole accused not guilty of the offence under Sections 418, 466, 468 and 471 IPC and acquitted him of the charges.
The brief facts of the case of the prosecution are as follows:
The Maratha community people of Kadapa town have been taking devoted interest in running and development of Hindu Religious Institution by name Sri Ramagiri Baba Ashram (‘Ashram’), which consist of several temples. While so, in the year 1994 the accused was elected as the Chairman of the Ashram and during his tenure he used a forged document and created a trust deed dated 25.9.1903 and produced the same before the endowment authorities and made it to appoint him as permanent trustee of the Ashram. Upon the complaint filed by the President of the Ashram under Section 200 Cr.P.C., cognizance of the offence was taken for the offence under Sections 418, 466, 468 and 471 IPC.
In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, on behalf of the complainant, P.Ws.1 to 12 were examined and Exs.P.1 to P.38 were marked. On behalf of defence, no evidence was adduced.
After evaluating the entire evidence brought on record, the trial Court acquitted the accused with the following observations:
“To attract an offence under Section 418 IPC, there should be cause of damage or loss to the complainant/Ashram. It is admitted by P.Ws.1 and 2 that there is no specific loss or damage caused to the Ashram by virtue of appointment of accused as permanent trustee. Further in the light of the investigation conducted, the accused was removed from the office of permanent trustee on the basis of complaint lodged by investigating agency.” The learned trial judge further observed that even though it is the case of the prosecution that the accused prepared/created a forged document i.e. trust deed and produced the same before the endowment authorities as genuine, the prosecution miserably failed to establish the fact that the said document was forged one and the said forged document was created by the accused. In para 24 of the judgment, the learned trial judge observed as follows:
“24. P.W.7, who is working as Scientific Assistant, F.S.L., Hyderabad deposed that he examined Ex.P.30 and gave his opinion which is marked as Ex.P.31 and he gave Ex.P.31 contains that “it is not possible to offer any opinion on the style of writing. Origin of ink and age of writing and ink and also opined that there are erases in the red enclosed portion marked Q.1 and Q.2 and he did not give any opinion whether the document is forged or genuine and he opined that there are erases in the Ex.P.30.”
Since the alleged forged document was only Xerox copy, the expert-P.W.7 could not offer any opinion regarding the hand writing. Once the prosecution failed to establish that the accused is the person, who created and forged the alleged document, then the question of proving the forged document does not arise. Further the alleged document was created long back on 25.9.1903 and the same was produced in the year 2004. Hence, this Court is of the view that the offence of forgery is not established by the prosecution. In view of the above, this Court feels that the prosecution miserably failed to bring home the guilt of the accused. Hence, this Court finds no ground to interfere with the impugned order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.
In the result, the appeal fails and the same is accordingly dismissed. Miscellaneous Petitions, if any, pending shall stand closed.
RAJA ELANGO,J 24.12.2014 Tsr