Mahavir Singh - (1.) THIS is a revision by Pyare Lal against the order of the Sessions Judge, Faizabad dismissing his appeal against his conviction under Section 468 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code.
(2.) THE relevant facts are that the appellant along with 11 persons moved an application for registration of Cooperative Society in the name of "Harijan Plastic Uddyog Sahkari Samiti." THE Society was registered. THEreafter certain loans of Rs. 6,000/- were sanctioned from the Industries Department and grants of Rs. 3,000/-and Rs. 6,00/ were sanctioned by the Harijan Welfare Department and Block Pura respectively. THE applicant was elected as a Chairman of the said society and it was alleged later when there was a change of Chairmanship that the signature of one of the members namely, Bajrang Lal were forged. THE applicant was thereupon charged for having cheated the registration department in getting the society registered and other departments for getting the loans or grants sanctioned. So a charge sheet was filed against him under Section 420 and 468 IPC by the CID. The applicant admitted that he was Chairman of the society and he got it registered and later it took loans from Industries, debt and grants from other deptts. But he denied to have forged signature of Bajrang Lal on the application form. He stated that he had given the application form to Chhedi Lai his brother and it was he who gave it back to him after getting it signed from Bajrang Lal. The Judicial Magistrate held that the signature of Bajrang on the application form were forged. He also was of the view that this forgery was made by the applicant himself. He also held that by that act he succeeded in getting the Society registered and also got loans and grants from different departments and thereby he committed the offences under 'Sections 468 and 420 IPC. He was sentenced to two years' RI under each offence. Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
(3.) ON appeal the learned Sessions Judge upheld the finding of the trial court that the signature of Bajrang Lal were forged by the applicant and further that because of that forgery, the registration authorities were induced to register the Society and other departments were induced to sanction the loans and grants. So he dismissed the appeal. In revision it has been contended that the findings of the courts below that the applicant forged the signatures of Bajrang Lal was not warranted from the evidence on record and secondly, that even if it was so, the offence u/Ss. 420 and 468 IPC cannot be said to have been proved.;