news details |
|
|
| Court acquits alleged impersonator CRPF cop in forgery case | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Jan 19: Principal Sessions Judge Jammu Vinod Chatterji Koul acquitted one Narinder Kumar S/o Rattan Lai R/o Rajwal, Tehsll Akhnoor A/P Ward No:7, Akhnoor who claimed to be a CRPF cop and can arrange service for recruitment in CRPF.
According to the police case that accused has been prosecuted for the offence punishable under section 420/467/468/171/201 RPC by the police of P/S Akhnoor. The allegations against the accused are that one Anil Sharma lodged a report with Police Station Akhnoor that he came in contact with accused Narinder Kumar, who claimed that he is working in CRPF and can arrange his recruitment in CRPF. Since, complainant Anil Sharma was unemployed he gave Rs 80,000 to the accused for recruitment and appointment order. Thereafter accused also took away Alto Car No: JK02AF-4240 from the complainant.
Principal Sessions Judge Jammu after hearing Adv Vishal Mahajan for the accused observed that the forgery of a document falls within the purview of section 467/RPC must be regarding a document mentioned in section 467/RPC and section 468/RPC is attracted when forgery of a document is done for the purpose of cheating, so in both the cases, what is to be established that the document has been forged. Forgery is defined in Section 463 and Section 464 deals with making of false document. So to hold the person guilty for the said offences the main ingredient to be proved is that was the document false or not and whether such documents were prepared by such person. Has it got scientifically examined and scientific evidence obtained regarding the authorship of such document. The Investigating Officer/Prosecution was required to send these documents to the forensic Lab, get the documents examined by the expert, ought to have obtained specimen writings and specimen signatures and got the same compared and analyzed by the expert. This has not been done in this case, thus, there is no evidence as to whether such documents which the witnesses have claimed to have been given to them by the accused, were prepared by him or not. There is also no evidence produced by the prosecution to hold the accused guilty for offence punishable under sections 420,171 or 201 RPC. No evidence to prove that accused was wearing the uniform of CRPF with the intention that it may be believed that he belongs to the CRPF.
Therefore having regard to the evidence produced by the prosecution and in view of the discussion made above the prosecution has failed to prove the charges against the accused beyond any doubt, as such the challan is dismissed accused is acquitted while his bail bond and surety bond shall also stand discharged. (JNF) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
