- (1.) THIS State appeal is directed against the judgment of the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Jaipur City, Jaipur dated 30th October, 1971.
(2.) THE brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of this appeal are that the Deputy Collector Jagir, Jaipur lodged a report with the police on 24th February, 1964 that Jagir Bonds amounting to Rs. 2,400/- were to be delivered to one Gyarsi Lal son of Nand Lal of Kanwar-pura; but it appears that someone else having impersonated himself has obtained these bonds from the office on 12th April, 1963. A case was registered and during investigation, it appeared that Jagir bonds amounting to Rs. 2. 400/- were prepared in the name of Gyarsi Lal and Gyarsi Lal was illiterate he used to take help from the accused-respondent Mohan Lal. It is alleged that the accused-respondent Mohan Lal produced Madan Lal son of Ram Niwas who alleged himself to be Gyarsi Lal and took away these Jagir bonds from the office of the Deputy Collector Jagir. It is contended that Chhagan Lal son of Ram Kumar indentified him as Gyarsi Lal. Madan Lal and Chhagan Lal were absconding and as such, the challan was submitted against the present accused respondent Mohan Lal under sections 419, 420 and 416 read with sections 468 and 471, IPC. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. On behalf of the prosecution the statements. Shri B. B. Kashyap, PW/1, Handwriting Expert, Bhom Raj PW/2, Gyarsi Lal PW/3 and Tara Chand PW/4 were recorded. I Shri B. B Kashyap PW/1, Handwriting Expert, stated that he came to the conclusion that 0/1 and 0/2 vide Ex. P/l were written by the same person who wrote S/l to S/2, the specimen handwriting vide Ex. P/2 to Ex. P/7. Bhom Raj PW/2 stated that he knows Gyarsilal and the accused Mohan Lal, both. As Gyarsi Lal was illiterate, he used to take assistance from Mohan Lal. Bhom Raj denied that he had signed as a witness identifying Gyarsi Lal in connection with taking away of the bonds vide Ex. P/25.
(3.) GYARSI Lal PW/3 has stated that the accused Mohan Lal and one Banshi Dhar used to look after his work in connection with the bonds. He has not received the consideration of the bonds. He has further contended that he did not know Tara Chand. He also denied his signatures on Ex. p/27 to Ex. p/36 through which these bonds were transferred to Tara Chand. Tara Chand PW/4 stated that he deals in the sale and purchase of Jagir bonds. He admitted that through Ex. p/27 to Ex p/36, he had purchased Jagir bonds from Gyarsi Lal, but he did not personally know the seller. According to him, accused Mohan Lal identified Gyarsi Lal to him. After taking into consideration the entire evidence on record, the learned trial Court came to the conclusion that the prosecution has not succeeded in bringing the guilt home to the accused and, as such, the accused respondent was acquitted of all the charges by the learned trial Court on 30th October, 1971. ;