Varikuppala Buchaiah vs The State Of A.P.
2023 Latest Caselaw 2873 Tel

                                   1



     THE HONOURABLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

       CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1565 OF 2011

O R D E R:

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed against the

judgment dated 25.07.2011 in Crl.A.No.106 of 2006 on the file of

the Court of learned IV Additional District Judge (II Fast Track

Court) at Nalgonda (for short, "the appellate Court") in confirming

the judgment dated 25.04.2006 in C.C.No.860 of 2003 on the file

of the Court of learned Additional Judicial First Class Magistrate,

at Bhongir (for short, "the trial Court").

2. Heard Sri Jalli Kanakaiah, learned counsel representing

Mr. Jalli Narender, learned counsel for the petitioner and

Mr. Vizarath Ali, learned Assistant Public Prosecutor appearing

for respondent state.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the Sub-Inspector of

Police, Gundala Police Station has filed charge sheet in Cr.No.16

of 2003 under Sections.420, 197 and 198 of I.P.C. and Section

12(b) of Passport Act, 1967 against accused Nos.1 and 2. Upon

thorough investigation it was found that petitioner herein who is

accused No.1 obtained a fake pass port under false identity.

Accused No.2 helped accused No.1 in issuing the fake residential

certificate for obtaining fake passport thereby, deceiving the

Government of India. Accused No.2 surrendered before the

Sessions Court and obtained anticipatory bail.

4. The trial Court vide judgment dated 25.04.2006 in

C.C.No.860 of 2003 directed accused No.1 to undergo rigorous

imprisonment for a period of six months and pay a fine of

Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment for period of

one month for the offence under Section 417 of I.P.C. and also

pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default to suffer simple imprisonment

for a period of one month for offence under Section 12(b) of the

Passport Act, 1967 by directing that the period of detention if any

already undergone by the accused No.1 shall be set off under

Section 428 of Cr.P.C. Aggrieved thereby, petitioner preferred an

appeal. The appellate Court vide judgment dated 25.07.2011 in

Crl.A.No.106 of 2006 dismissed the appeal by confirming the

judgment passed by the trial Court. Hence, the present Revision.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that there was

no credible and corroborative evidence to show that the petitioner

filed the application for issuing the passport in the name of

Varikuppala Lingaiah and the trial Court as well as the appellate

Court found the petitioner guilty of the offence under Section 417

of I.P.C. Therefore, seeks to set aside the impugned judgment.

6. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor submitted that the

appellate court after careful consideration of the evidence

available on record rightly passed the impugned judgment and

therefore, sought to dismiss the Revision.

7. The trial Court, on behalf of the respondent, examined

PWs.1 to 6 and marked Exs.P1 to P25. On behalf of petitioners,

none were examined and no document was marked. The trial

Court upon careful consideration of the oral and documentary

evidence found that PWs.2 and 3, who were the villagers who

identified the person as Varikuppala Butchaiah from the

photograph, turned hostile. PWs.4 and 5, who were the panchas

to the seizure panchanama also turned hostile. However, found

that Ex P13 collected by PW6 corroborates with the evidence of

PW1 with regard to the offence of cheating committed by the

petitioner. Thereby, convicted the petitioner-accused No.1 for the

offence of cheating under Section 417 of I.P.C and Section 12(b)

of the Passport Act.

8. The trial Court further observed that to establish the guilt

of accused No.2, the prosecution relied upon Ex.P7 which was a

xerox copy of residential certificate. Further, neither PW1 nor the

Investigating Officer, PW6 have taken pains to gather necessary

evidentiary proof from the Office of Mandal Revenue Office which

ultimately lead to issuance of the above certificate which was a

xerox copy and rejected to adduce the same as secondary

evidence and thereby acquitted accused No.2 from the alleged

offence.

9. On an appeal being preferred by the petitioner, the

appellate Court found that the evidence of PW1 corroborated with

the documentary evidence in respect to the offence of cheating

committed by petitioner No.1 with a fictitious name to obtain the

passport. In view of the consistent evidence of PW1 being

supported by documentary evidence, the appellate Court rightly

held that the prosecution established the guilt of petitioner No.1

for the offence under Section 417 of I.P.C. beyond reasonable

doubt and thereby confirmed the judgment passed by the trial

Court. Therefore, I do not find any irregularity or perversity in the

impugned judgment.

10. A perusal of the material available on record shows that

this Court vide order dated 27.07.2011 suspended the sentence

of imprisonment imposed against the petitioner for the offence

punishable under Section 12(b) of Passport Act, 1967 during the

pendency of the case and released the petitioner on bail on

executing personal bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- with two

sureties for a like sum each to the satisfaction of learned

Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Bhongir, at

Nalgonda District.

11. However, as the petitioner, suffered mental agony and

hardship during the course of litigation before the trial Court as

well as the appellate Court, the sentence imposed upon the

petitioner is hereby reduced to the period of detention already

undergone by him under Section 428 of Cr.P.C.

12. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case stands dismissed.

Miscellaneous Petitions, pending if any, shall stand closed.

_____________________ E.V. VENUGOPAL, J Date: 04.10.2023 ESP

THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE E. V. VENUGOPAL

CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.1565 OF 2011

Dated: 04.10.2023

ESP