Tripura High Court
Sri Baratan Jamatia (Age 41 Years) vs The State Of Tripura on 19 December, 2022
Page 1 of 7
HIGH COURT OF TRIPURA
AGARTALA
Crl.Rev.P. No.19/2021
Sri Baratan Jamatia (Age 41 years), S/O. Sri Rabindra Jamatia, resident of
West Manu, Jamatia Para, P.S.-Santirbazar, District-South Tripura.
...... Petitioner(s)
VERSUS
The State of Tripura
......Respondent(s)
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. D.J. Saha, Advocate.
For Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Debnath, Addl. P.P.
HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
Date of hearing and judgment : 19th December, 2022.
Whether fit for reporting : YES/NO.
JUDGMENT & ORDER (ORAL)
Heard Mr. D.J. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the
petitioner. Also heard Mr. S. Debnath, learned Additional Public Prosecutor
appearing for the respondent-State.
2. By means of this revision petition filed under Section 397 read
with Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C., for short), the
petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 03.03.2021 passed by the
learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in case No. Criminal Appeal
06 of 2019 whereby the learned Judge has upheld the judgment and order of
sentence dated 06.03.2019 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist
Class, Belonia, South Tripura in case No. GR 297 of 2008 directing the
accused-petitioner to suffer R.I. for a term of one year and to pay a fine of
Rs.5,000/- in default to suffer S.I. for 30 days for commission of offence
punishable under Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC, for short).
3. Petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:
"(i) Admit this Revision Petition.
(ii) Call the records pertaining to Criminal Appeal 6
of 2019, from the court of the Ld. Sessions Judge, South
Tripura, Belonia.
(iii) Pass an order for preparation of the paper book.
(iv) Would be kind enough to suspend the sentence
of the Petitioner, till disposal of the instant Revision Petition.
(v) After hearing the sides be kind enough to set
aside the impugned Judgment and exonerate the Petitioner
from any criminal liability.
(vi) Pass any other order/orders as this Hon'ble
Court deems fit and proper."
4. Case of the petitioner as it revealed from the F.I.R. as well as
from record, in a nutshell, is that Md. Nurul Miah, ASI of Police (S/B)
lodged a complaint before the Officer-in-Charge, Santirbazar Police Station
stating, inter alia, that on 08.07.2008 one accused Abdul Khalek came before
him in connection with an inquiry for his document for the purpose of
International Passport and during verification it is revealed that the copy of
PRTC and school certificate which were enclosed with his application for
International Passport do not tally and the same documents are found not
genuine and it is presumed that these documents were forged for the purpose
of cheating. Accordingly, an F.I.R. was registered and after investigation,
charge-sheet was submitted against the accused Abdul Khalek along with
other co-accused namely Abdul Kalam and Baratan Jamatia, who were
alleged to have forged the said documents, under Sections 468/471 of IPC.
Thereafter, charge was framed against the present accused-petitioner Baratan
Jamatia under Section 468 of IPC to which he pleaded not guilty. After
completion of trial, learned trial Judge vide judgment dated 06.03.2019
convicted the accused-petitioner under Section 468 of IPC and sentenced
him to suffer R.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- in default to
suffer S.I. for 30 days. Aggrieved thereby, the accused-petitioner preferred
an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia
whereby the learned Sessions Judge vide judgment dated 03.03.2021
dismissed the appeal upholding the judgment of the learned trial Court.
Assailing the impugned judgment of the learned Sessions Judge, petitioner
has filed this revision petition. Hence, this case.
5. Mr. D.J. Saha, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner,
contends that the allegation against the accused-petitioner is that certain
documents which were recovered from him were forged and he was
preparing them. But the petitioner has not submitted any application for
procuring passport. Rather accused Abdul Khalek submitted the application
and during investigation name of the accused petitioner came up. His name
did not find place in the F.I.R. During examination of witnesses, PW-1, 2
and 3 did not speak anything about the accused petitioner. From the
deposition of PW-4 it is apparent that during their search at Brajamohan
Jamatia Para, the shop of Baratan Jamatia, the accused petitioner, was found
closed and he was detained from his house and as per their direction, he
came at his shop and opened the door. Some documents and seals were
allegedly seized from his shop but surprisingly the case docket does not
contain any hand-sketch map of the alleged place of occurrence from where
some documents and seals were allegedly recovered from the possession of
the accused petitioner. The prosecution also failed to show any document
that the shop belongs to the accused petitioner. PW-9, I.O. S.I. Jhunu Lal
Das stated that he did not investigate who was held the post of Headmaster
at Tuikarma High School on 13.02.2000 on which date the alleged school
certificate of accused Abdul Khalek was issued in his favour. He also stated
that he did not verify who was the then SDM of Santirbazar on 03.05.2007
when the forged permanent residential certificate of Abdul Khalek was
issued and he also did not collect the signature of the then SDM for expert
opinion. I.O. also did not inform any of the local respected persons of that
locality before searching the shop of accused petitioner Baratan Jamatia.
Witness also stated that in his charge-sheet he did not mention which
witness identified the shop of Baratan Jamatia. So, counsel urged that the
manner of identification of the shop of the accused petitioner in his absence
and thereafter calling him from his residence creates a shadow of doubt on
the recovery of alleged documents and seals from the shop of accused
petitioner. Accordingly, he prays for setting aside the impugned judgment
dated 03.03.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge upholding the
judgment and order of conviction and sentence dated 06.03.2019 passed by
the learned trial Court.
6. On the other hand, Mr. S. Debnath, learned Addl. Public
Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-State, vehemently objected the
submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner contending
that the ingredients of Section 468 of IPC are that the intention of the forgery
should be that the forged document is to be used for the purpose of cheating.
Counsel also contends that while searching the shop of accused Baratan
Jamatia certain documents and seals were recovered and seized. So, Section
106 of the Evidence Act cast a duty upon the accused to clarify himself how
he was holding these forged documents and seals in his possession and for
what purpose, but during 313 Cr.P.C. examination accused petitioner stated
nothing about this. So, it is apparent that those forged documents and seals
were found from the shop of the accused and he used those seals and
documents for the purpose of cheating thereby attracting the ingredients of
Section 468 of IPC. As such, learned Sessions Judge rightly dismissed the
appeal upholding the judgment and order of sentence passed by the trial
Court. Accordingly, he contends that there is no error in the impugned
judgment passed by the learned Sessions Judge and prays for dismissal of
the revision petition.
7. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both
the parties, this Court is of the considered view that the counsel for the
revision petitioner argued on the point of evidence that has already been
appreciated by the original side in the appellate Court and the scope for
revision is very minimal and the counsel has not made out a case for
interfering in the revision jurisdiction. Accordingly, the instant revision
petition stands dismissed. Consequently, the impugned judgment dated
03.03.2021 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, South Tripura, Belonia in
case No. Criminal Appeal 06 of 2019 is hereby confirmed upholding the
judgment and order of sentence dated 06.03.2019 passed by the learned
Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Belonia, South Tripura in case No. GR 297 of
2008.
8. Send down the lower court records forthwith.
Pending application(s), if any, also stands disposed of.
CHIEF JUSTICE (ACTING)
Pulak
