S.RATNAVEL PANDIAN - (1.) THESE three appeals by grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India arise out of the common judgment rendered by the High Court of Allahabad acquitting all these three appellants of various offences with which they all along with one Dr. R. V. S. Sharma stood charged, tried, convicted and sentenced for various terms of imprisonment. Dr. R. V. S. Verma, who was arrayed as accused No. 1 died during the pendency of the trial and as such the trial against him abated. Therefore, the trial went on as against RP Agarwal, Mahfooz ali Khan, Pheru Singh and Mohd. Ismail Khan (who were arrayed as accused Nos. 2 to 5).
(2.) THE Trial Court framed as many as ten charges against all the accused persons put up for trial under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation, the gist of which we would presently mention, they being that all the five accused on or about 1-3-67 in Mainpuri city entered into a criminal conspiracy, by agreeing to hush up the offence of theft or criminal breach of trust in respect of shortage in Government cash to the tune of Rs. 9600.00 on the office of the District Medical Officer of Health Mainpuri and make up the same from the funds of B. D. Bhargava, who was the Head Clerk in the Department under threat of dire consequences, and in furtherance of the said conspiracy on the evening of 1-3-67, Dr. Verma took Bhargava to Kotwali, Mainpuri in a jeep bearing registration No. UPD 9461 driven by Mahfooz Ali and in collusion with Pheru Singh, Mohd. Ismail wrongfully confined Bhargava in the Police Station from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m., committed extortion by putting Bhargava in fear of injury to him and dishonestly induced him to deliver money and towards that end took Bhargava to Agra on the same night by the same jeep and wrongfully restrained him .from 11 p.m. on 1-3-67 to 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. on 2-3-67; Dr. Verma, Pheru Singh and Mohd. Ismail along with one Constable took Bhargava to his house at Agra at 8. 15 a. m in the same jeep driven by Mahfooz Ali, induced him and his wife to deliver pre-mature fixed deposit receipts worth Rand 9500/- and got them encashed from the State Bank of India at Agra on the same day for Rs. 9427.58. It is further stated that on 3-3-67, Dr. Verma in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy fabricated false evidence by preparing a report (Exh. Ka 6), the orginal of which was sent to Kotwali Police Station where it was entered in the general diary on 3-3-67 and that Agarwal and Mahfooz ali Khan fabricated false evidence by making incorrect entries in Exh. Ka 11 and Exh. Ka 12 in the log book (Exh. 6) of the concerned jeep and that on the 2nd and 3rd of March 1967, Dr. Verma caused evidence of the commission of offence to disappear or criminal breach of trust with the intention of screening the offender from the legal punishment; and that Dr. Verma got the cash books (Exh. 1 to 3) back-dated 1-3-67 and prepared a report (Exh. Ka 6) Knowing it to be incorrect and for this end R. P. Agarwal and Mahfooz Ali made false entries in Exh. Ka 11 and Exh. 12 in the log book (Exh. 6) and similarly Pheru Singh and Mohmad Ismail made false entries in GD and that Dr. Verma on 3-3-67 forged report (Exh. Ka 6) and got it entered in the despatch register (Exh. 4) by antedating the same as if the entry was made even on 1-3-67 and that Agarwal by making the false entries cheated the Government of Uttar Pradesh to the extent or Rs. 12.00 in his TA bill (Exh. Ka 15) and Mahfooz Ali Khan cheated the Government to the extent of Rs. 3.75 through his TA bill (Exh. Ka 17) both to them thereby fraudulantly claiming the TA bills. We give the following table with reference to the penal provisions under which all the accused persons stood charged on the above allegations for proper understanding of the case :- JUDGEMENT_288_SUPP1_1989Html1.htm The Trial Court convicted and sentenced A-2 to A-5 namely R. P. Agarwal. 384/120-B two years under Section 388/120 Mahfooz Ali, Pheru singh and Mohd. Ismail under respective charges for varying and varied terms of imprisonment as found in the Order of the Judgment which we reproduce below:- "Accused persons R.P.Agrawal, Mahfooz ali Khan, Pheru Singh and Mohd. Ismail Khan are convicted under Sections 120-B,384,388,342,341,193,201,218,466 and 420 all read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. "Accused persons Pheru Singh and Mohd. Ismail Khan are hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under Section 120-B; six months under Section 384/120-B two years under Section 388/120-B; four months under Section 342/120-B; one month under Section 341/120-B; one year under Section 193/120-B; one year under Section 201/120-B; one year under Section 201/120-B; two months under Section 218/120-B two months under Section 466/120 B. and one month under Section 420/120-B of the Indian Penal Code. Accused persons R .P. Agarwal and Mahfooz Ali Khan are hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months under - Section 120-B, one month under Section 384/120-B, two months under Section 388/120-8, one month under Section 342/120 B, fine of Rs. 50.00each and in default simple imprisonment for one week under Section 341/120-B, rigorous imprisonment for one year under, Section 193/120-B, two months under Section. 201/120-B, four months under Section 218/120-B; two months under Section 466/-20-B, and six months under Section 420-120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The sentences of all the accused persons shall run concurrently."
(3.) ON being aggrieved by the above judgment, convicted accused namely Mohd. Isamil (Accused No. 5), Pheru Singh (Accused No. 4), Mahfooz Ali (Accused No. 3), and R. P. Agarwal (Accused No. 2) preferred Criminal Appeal Nos.333/76, 35476,357/76 and 374/76 respectively question the correctness and legality of their convictions. The High Court by a re-appraisal of the evidence adduced by the prosecution concluded that the prosecution has not decisively proved the case and the evidence inclusive of the circumstantial evidence are inconsistent with the presumption of innocence of the accused and as such the appellants/accused are entitled to the benefit of doubt. Consequently for the reasons mentioned in the judgment, the High Court allowed all the appeals by its common judgment by setting aside the convictions and sentences recorded by the Trial Court. The State on being dissatisfied, filed Special Leave Petitions in respect of each of the accused. The Special Leave Petition filed by the State in respect of acquittal of R. P. Agarwal was dismissed by this Court. However, special leave was granted in respect of Mahfooz Ali Khan Mohd. Ismail find Pheru Singh and as such by grant of special leave these three appeals are before us i.e. Criminal Appeal Nos'. 132-133/1984 and 531/1984 in respect of acquittal of Pheru Singh, Mohd. Ismail and Mahfooz Ali respectively.;