- (1.) THE instant revision petition has been filed against the concurrent judgment of the Courts below holding the petitioner guilty of offence under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code in FIR No.54 dated 25.8.1999 registered at Police Station Jalandhar Cantt.
(2.) BRIEF facts that would require notice are that an application bearing No.6770 -M dated 18.5.1999 was sent by the Commandant 4th Indian Reserve Btn. to the police to the effect that the petitioner was recruited in the Btn. as a Constable, but lateron, on verification it was found that his Matriculation certificate was forged and, accordingly, enquiry was initiated and in pursuance thereto, he was dismissed from service. On the basis of such application, FIR No.54 dated 25.8.1999 was registered against the petitioner under Sections 419, 420, 465, 467, 471 of the Indian Penal Code at Police Station Jalandhar Cantt. After completion of investigations, challan was presented against the petitioner and he was charge -sheeted by the learned Magistrate under Sections 420, 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
(3.) THE prosecution, to prove its case, examined PW1 -SI Satnam Singh, PW2 -Neelam Kumari, PW3 -ASI Rajinder Singh, PW4 -ASI Manjit Singh, PW5 -Sukhdev Singh and PW6 -Kamal Singh. After closure of prosecution evidence, the incriminating material was put to the accused/petitioner under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. In his statement recorded, the petitioner re -affirmed his innocence. However, no evidence was led in defence. Upon considering the evidence adduced on record, the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Jalandhar vide order, dated 6.4.2004, acquitted the petitioner of the charge under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code giving him benefit of doubt, but held him guilty under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. Upon conviction and by separate order of even date i.e. 6.4.2004, the petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 100/ - and in default thereof, to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for seven days. The appeal preferred by the petitioner, against the order of conviction dated 6.4.2004 passed by the trial Court, has been dismissed vide judgment dated 5.9.2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Jalandhar thereby upholding his conviction under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the lower Appellate Court has interfered insofar as quantum of sentence is concerned and the sentence of imprisonment i.e. rigorous imprisonment for one year awarded by the trial Court has been reduced to a period of six months.;