C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 1 of 20
IN THE COURT OF THE VIII ADDL.CHIEF METROPOLITAN
MAGISTRATE :HYDERABAD
PRESENT: Smt. Kavitha Karnati,
VIII Addl. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate,
Hyderabad.
Dated this the 20 th day of October, 2022
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
Between:
The State through The Sub-Inspector of Police, Police Station, Dabeerpura. …Complainant
AND
1. Mirza Qurram Baig, S/o. Late Mirza Qadar Baig, Age: 51 yrs, Occ: Draughts Man Grade-III (under suspension) R/o. H.No. 9-4-138/44, Grammer Colont, Tolichowki, Hyderabad.
Note: The case against Accused No. 1 was abated.
2. Afzal Baig, S/o. Mohd Baig, Age: 60 yrs, Occ: Pensioner, R/o. H.No. 19-3-1089/A/72/A, Madina Colony, Jahanuma, Hyderabad.
3. J. Padma Rao, S/o. Peeraiah, Age 52 yrs, Occ: Jr. Asst (U/suspension) R/o. H.No. 2-6-77, Bharath Nagar, Uppal Hyderabad. …Accused
This case is coming before me on 11-10-2022 for final hearing, in the presence of Learned APPO Sri. L. Kishan for the State and of Sri. Abdul Wahab, Counsel for Accused No.2 and Sri. Mohd Muzafullah Khan, Counsel for the Accused No.3 and having stood over for consideration till this day, this court made the following:
:: J U D G M E N T ::
The Sub-Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura Police Station has filed charge sheet against accused for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 109 of Indian Penal Code.
2)The brief facts of the prosecution case are as follows:
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 2 of 20
The prosecution case is that the then Secretary of Quli Qutub Shah
Urban Development Authority, Hyderabad (is hereby referred as QQSUDA) has lodged a report dated 24-04-2015 before Police Dabeerpura informing that it was brought to the notice that, the Principal Secretary to
Government., M.A. & U.D, Department through the letter 18-03-2015 to examine the Vigilance & Enforcement report vide No. 2987, dated 16-2-2015 wherein it is observed that the employees of the QQSUDA have illegally appointed/promoted on fake certificates and recommended to place under suspension coupled with criminal prosecution by mentioning the irregularities committed by Accused No. 1 to Accused No. 3 in tabular format and also the proposed actions, further requested to take necessary action as per the recommendation of the Principal Secretary to Government., M.A. & U.D,
Department, Hyderabad, finally requested to take necessary action.
3. Basing on the above report, LW-7/Sri. K.S. Ravi, the then Sub-Inspector of Police, registered a case in Crime No. 48 of 2015 for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471, 109 IPC and took up investigation and filed charge sheet after completion of investigation.
4. The Court has taken congnizance for the offences punishable under section 420, 468, 471 and 109 of IPC and issued summons to the accused.
5. On service of summons, the accused appeared before the court, after compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C, they were examined under section 239
Cr.P.C for which they denied and charges were framed for the offences punishable under sections 420 and 109 of IPC against Accused No. 2 and 420, 471 and 468 of IPC against Accused No. 3, read over and explained to
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 3 of 20
them in vernacular language for which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Hence trial proceeded.
6. So as to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution has examined PW1 to PW7 and Ex.P1 to Ex.P26 were marked.
On behalf of the prosecution Defacto complainant/LW-1/Sri. Md. Zaheer was examined as PW1. LW-2/Sri. B. Anjaiah, who acted as Witness was examined as PW2. LW-3/Sri. K. Ramulu, who acted as Panch witness for
Observation Panchanama was examined as PW3. LW-4/S.V. Sudhakar Reddy, who furnished the verification report of A-3 was examined as PW4. O.
Madhusudhan and Raghunandhan Rao who were summoned vide Crl. M. P.
No. 2239 of 2018 were examined as PWs5 and 6 respectively and LW-7/Sri.
K.S. Ravi, Investigation Officer was examined as PW7. The learned APPO has given up the evidence of LW-6/Sri. Rajan Kurian, who furnished the verification report of A-1 as such his evidence was closed.
7. On behalf of the prosecution, Ex.P1 is report, Ex.P2 is attested copy of promotion letter of Accused No. 1, from Chairman to Tracer. Ex.P3 is attested copy of promotion letter of Accused No. 1 from Chairman to Draught man Gr-
III. Ex.P4 is Attested copy of requisition filed by Accused No. 1 to AE requesting for promotion from Draught man Gr-III to AE. Ex.P5 is the attested copy of requisition filed by Accused No. 1 to Secretary by submitting the technical qualifications in Diploma in Civil Engineering from
Vinayaka Machine Research Foundation. Ex.P6 is three certificates. Ex.P7 is attested copy of requisition submitted by QQSUDA to the Registrar VMRF deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu for verifications of certificates filed by
Accused No. 1. Ex.P8 is the attested copy of reply submitted by VMRF
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 4 of 20
deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu stating that the certificates submitted by Accused No. 1 are fake. Ex.P9 is attested copy of letter addressed by
QQSUDA to Controller of examination, VMRF deemed University, Selam,
Tamilnadu. Ex.P10 is Attested copy of report submitted by Controller of examination, VMRF deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu. Ex.P11 is attested copy of proceedings of Accused No. 3 promoting him from Attender to Junior Assistant with a condition to complete the degree within five years.
Ex.P12 is attested copy of proceedings of Accused No. 3 promoting him as
Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant. Ex. P13 is the attested copy ofletter addressed by Accused No. 3 for release of increment stating that he has qualified BA (Arts) from Andhra University. Ex.P14 is two certificates submitted by Accused No. 3. Ex.P15 is the attested copy of proceedings releasing the increment to Accused No. 3. Ex.P16 is the attested copy of letter addressed to Registrar Andhra University for verification of certificates submitted by Accused No. 3. Ex.P17 is the attested copy of Remainder letter submitted to Registrar, Andhra University. Ex.P18 is the attested copy of report submitted by Registrar, Andhra University. Ex.P19 is the attested copy of Vigilance report. Ex.P20 is the attested copy of directions given to
PW1 by Principal Secretary Government MA & UD Department. Ex.P21 is the attested copy of proceedings of Accused No. 3 promoting him as Senior
Assistant to from Junior Assistant. Ex.P22 is the attested copy of proceedings of Accused No. 3 promoting him as Superintendent from Senior
Assistant. Ex.P23 is Crime Details Form. Ex.P24 is letter addressed by PW4 to the Sub-Inspector of Police, Dabeerpura. Ex.P25 is the FIR, Ex.P26 is the reply from LW6/Rajan Kurian stating that the said certificates in the name of
Accused No. 1 not issued by the university and it is fake.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 5 of 20
On behalf of the Accused exhibits D1 to D3 were marked. Ex.D1 is an application submitted by Accused No.1 before QQSUDA, dated 23-12-2014.
Ex.D2 is requisition submitted by Accused No.1 to QQSUDA, dated 05-09- 2014. Ex.D3 is Representation submitted to QQSUDA, dated 20-11-2010.
8. After closure of the prosecution evidence, accused were examined under section 313 of Cr.P.C. for which they denied and reported no defence evidence.
9. Heard both sides. Perused the record and Written arguments filed by the learned counsel for Accused No. 2.
10. After assuming the charges of this Court, dated 26-08-2022, as VIII
Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, I have taken up the case at the
stage of further arguments and proceeded further.
11. Now the Points arise for my determination are:
1. Whether the Prosecution could able to prove the guilt of
Accused Nos. 2 and 3 for the offences under Section 109, 420
and 420, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code, beyond reasonable
doubt?
2. To what relief?
POINT No. 1:
12.The prosecution has examined the PWs 1 to 7, among which MD.
Zaheer, the then Secretary of QQSUDA was examined as PW1, B. Anjaiah, the then Secretary of QQSUDA was examined as PW2, K. Ramulu, the then office sub-ordinate/panch witness for observation of scene of offence was
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 6 of 20
examined as PW3, S. V. Sudhakar Reddy, the then Deputy Registrar (Exams) of Andhra University, Vishakapatnam was examined as PW4, O.
Madhusudhan, the then Chief Information Engineer, I & PR Department,
Vijayawada was examined as PW5, N. Raghunandhan Rao retired employee who worked as Secretary in QQSUDA was examined as PW6. PW5 and 6 deposed before this court as per the orders of this court in Crl. M.P. No. 2239 of 2018. K. S. Ravi, the then Sub-Inspector of Police/Investigation Officer was examined as PW7.
13. All the witnesses i.e., PWs 1 to 7 have supported the prosecution case without discrepancies and contradictions. Further there is corroboration in the evidence of all the prosecution witness with each other.
14. PW1 has deposed that Accused No. 3 has got promotion as Junior
Assistant with a condition that he should pass degree within 4 years of the promotion, after 4 years, Accused No. 3 has submitted degree certificate issued by Andhra University, Vishakapatnam before the then Secretary of the
Department, then the Secretary has sent the certificate to the above institution to verify its genuinity. Then the institute has received reply stating that the certificate is fake one, he further deposed that Accused No. 3 is also promoted as Senior Assistant and increments were also released. He further deposed that Accused No. 2 is abetted Accused No. 1 for getting fake certificates and submitting the same before the Department and there is a vigilance enquiry in connection with the fake certificates. He further deposed that one Madhusudhan and Raghunadhan Rao were the Secretaries of
QQSUDA for the concerned period.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 7 of 20
14.1. In his cross examination, by the learned counsel for Accused No.
2, he stated that he was not secretary by the date of incident, he has no personal knowledge about the case. He admitted that basing on the vigilance report vide Ex.P19, he has filed this case vide Ex.P1. He further admitted that
Accused No. 2 was superintendent by then. He further admitted that the duty of the Superintendent is to control the sub-ordinates and to see the duties of sub-ordinates. If the superintendent came to know anything about the work, he will have to inform the same to his superiors. He further admitted that
Ex.P7 and P9 were prepared by Accused No. 2.
14.2. PW1 has stated in his cross examination done by the learned counsel for the Accused No. 3, that he has filed Ex.P1 on the instructions of
Municipal Secretary, Accused No. 3 has not produced any certificates before him, that he has not mention the serial number and year of the certificate in
Ex.P1, which was alleged to be submitted by Accused No. 3. He further stated that he has not sent the certificates of Accused No. 3 to Andhra
University, he admitted that he has not verified the certificate that alleged to have submitted by Accused No. 3 and nothing specific was elicited by learned counsel for Accused No. 3 from the cross examination of PW1 in favour of Accused No. 3 and against the prosecution case.
15. Coming to the evidence of PW2, who deposed before this court stating that he know all the accused that they were working in his office, he further deposed that Accused No. 3 was joined as Attender in their
Department in the year 1996. Subsequently, he was promoted as Junior
Assistant on condition, in the year 2007, Accused No. 3 has filed an application for promotion as Senior Assistant and at that time, he has submitted degree certificate issued by Andhra University along with an
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 8 of 20
application. He further deposed that in the year 2007, Accused No. 3 promoted as Senior Assistant, their office has sent the certificate of Accused
No. 3 to Andhra University for verification and the University has gave reply stating that the certificate is fake one. He further deposed that there was vigilance enquiry and has submitted a report. He further deposed that
Accused No. 2 and Accused No. 3 (along with Accused No. 1 ) were suspended by the department after vigilance report. Accused No. 2 was retired from his services before vigilance report.
15.1. In his cross examination done by the learned counsel for the
Accused No. 2, he stated that he was not examined by the vigilance officer, he never work along with Accused No. 2. He admitted that he has no personal knowledge and by going through the vigilance report he has deposed before this court, he has not stated before Police that Accused No. 2 has supported Accused No. 1 and Accused No. 2 for submitting fake certificates.
15.2. PW2 has stated in the cross examination done by learned counsel for the accused No.3, that Accused No. 3 has not submitted any certificate before him, he has no authority to collect any certificate from any of the employee for their promotions, he has not sent the certificates to any college for obtaining information. He further stated that he has no personal knowledge as to when and which certificate of Accused No. 3 was sent for verification.
16. On analyzing the evidence of PWs1 and 2 they have deposed that
Accused No. 3 got promotion on condition that he has to submit degree certificate as mentioned in Ex.P11 and the then Secretary has sent
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 9 of 20
certificates of Accused No. 3 vide Ex.P14 to the Andhra University for verification of genuinity of the certificates. They further deposed that the
Andhra University has addressed a letter vide Ex.P18 stating that the
Bachelors of Arts of original degree of Accused No. 3 was verified with their records and found not genuine. They have further deposed that there was vigilance enquiry and report was submitted by vigilance vide Ex.P19. The testimony PWs 1 and 2 and the exhibits coupled with 1 to 22, 24 and 26 that the prosecution has successfully proved the guilty of the Accused No. 3 that
Accused No. 3 has submitted his educational certificates vide Ex.P14 were fake, as per the report of Ex.P18. In the cross examination of PWs 1 and 2 done by the learned counsel for Accused No.3 has posed questions that they were not the persons who sent the certificate of Accused No. 3 to Andhra
University for its genuineness and also the Accused No. 3 has not submitted any alleged certificates before them. PWs 1 and 2 were deposed before this court to place the information on their officials capacity on behalf of their institute. But not out of their personal interest. More over the learned counsel for Accused No. 3 has not elicited in rivalry and inimical terms in between PWs 1 and 2 and accused to depose before this court against accused as such the contentions of the Accused No. 3 have not sustained and lost its significance.
17. Coming to the evidence of PW3 who was panch witness for observation of scene of offence has deposed before this court that in his presence and in the presence of LW-4 Ajay Kumar, co-panch, Police Dabeerpura has conducted scene of offence panchnama and prepared Crime Details Form and drawn rough sketch vide Ex.P23 and in his cross examination nothing was elicited against the prosecution by the learned counsel for Accused No. 2 and Accused No. 3.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 10 of 20
18. Coming to the evidence of PW4 who deposed before this court that on 11-01-2016 he received a letter from Police Dabeerpura along with one certificate of J.Padma Rao to verify the genuineness of said certificate and to issue report, as such he verified the certificate and found that it is a fake one and not genuine after verifying the records of the office, he further deposed that the format of the said certificate is itself fake and not tallied with original certificate of said university. He further deposed that he has received the photostat copy of Ex.P14 for verification of its genuineness. Accordingly after verification he has issued letter by mentioning the certificate under Ex.P14 as not genuine vide Ex.P24. The learned counsel for Accused No. 2 has not choose to cross examine PW4 by reporting nil. In the cross examination done by the learned counsel for Accused No. 3, further stated that he has stated that the letter was addressed to the Andhra University for verification of the certificate of Accused No. 3, further stated that there were standing instructions from the Registrar regarding conducting examinations and genuineness of certificates etc., He further stated that, he has verified the genuinity of photostat copy of Ex.P14. He further stated in his cross examination that the Ex.P24 does not carries any official seal of Andhra
University to which PW4 stated that for general correspondencethe seal will not be used.
19. PW4 was the then Deputy Registrar (Exams) of Andhra University,
Vishakapatnam, who deposed and supported the prosecution case and the learned counsel for Accused No. 3 has not elicited any basis or reasons which mandates him to depose false and against Accused No.3. PW4 has issued
Ex.P24, dated 18-01-2016 after verification, which addressed to the
Investigation Officer on their letter vide reference cited therein, in the
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 11 of 20
capacity of Deputy Registrar (Exams) under the administrative controller of the Registrar. Whereas Ex.P18 was issued by the then Special Registrar and
Controller of exams addressing to the Secretary QQSUDA to the reply of their letter vide reference cited, dated 22-12-2009. Both exhibits vide Ex.P18 and 24 issued in various periods which reveal that the certificates of Accused
No.3 were fake.
20. PW5 and PW6 deposed before this court as per the orders in
Crl.M.P. No.2239 of 2018. PW5 deposed that he was worked as Secretary for
QQSUDA from 2004 to 2009, he further deposed that in the year 2005,
Accused No.3 has submitted his degree certificate for the purpose of promotion as Senior Assistant as such he addressed a letter to Andhra
University in the year 2005 to verify the genuineness of the said certificate, he has waited till the year 2007 for the information from Andhra University.
Then they proceeded for the promotion of the Accused No.3, Accused No.3 got promotion as Senior Assistant which is conditional promotion subject to verification of genuineness of degree certificate vide Ex.P11. Then Accused
No.3 made a special request for release of Annual Grade Increment in the cadre of Junior Assistant as his annual grade increment was with held subject to obtaining degree certificate. He further deposed that as such he sanctioned the increment. Thereafter in the year 2008 again he requested the university to furnish said information for genuineness of the degree certificate of Accused No.3. He further deposed that in his tenure Accused
No.2 worked as Superintendent establishment and he used to look after the issues of administration of the staff.
20.1. PW5 has stated in his cross examination done by the learned counsel for accused No.2 that he was not examined by the Police, by the
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 12 of 20
Vigilance Department regarding this case and nothing specific was elicited by the learned counsel for the Accused No.2.
20.2. PW5 has stated in his cross examination done by the learned counsel for Accused No.3 by admitting that he has not aware about the enquiry by the Vigilance Department in this case. He further admitted that he was not examined by the Vigilance Department and also by the Police in this case. He further admitted that the roll number mentioned in Ex.P15 is varied from the roll number mentioned in Ex.P16, to which PW5 stated that it is a typographical mistake. He further admitted that Accused No.3 has not personally handed over any certificates to him to which he further stated that those certificates were handed over in the section and the same is elicited by the learned counsel for the accused No.3 in the cross examination by the witness. Here the Admissions made by the witness does not help the
Accused in disproving the charges against him and these admissions place no specific role.
21. Coming to the evidence of PW6 who deposed before this court that he was retired as secretary in QQSUDA, he know Accused No. 1 to Accused No. 3 who worked in QQSUDA, he further deposed that in the year 2009 he has sent the requisition to Andhra University under Ex.P17 for verification of genuineness of degree certificate submitted by Accused No.3 and he has received a reply from Andhra University vide Ex.P18 stating that the said certificates are not genuine, after receiving information from the Andhra
University he has informed the same to his superior officer for necessary steps.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 13 of 20
21.1 In his cross examination done by the counsel for the Accused
No.2, he stated that he was not examined by the Police, Vigilance
Department and nothing specific was elicited by the learned counsel for the
Accused No.2.
21.2. PW6 has stated in his cross examination done by the learned counsel for Accused No.3 that he has not filed any document to show that as he worked from the year 2009 to 2014 as secretary in QQSUDA. Here, it is pertinent to mention that as per the orders in Crl.M.P. No.2239 of 2018 PW6 has deposed before this court and the orders of this court vide Crl.M.P. No.
2239 of 2018 were unchallenged as such the Accused No.3 has lost his right to raise objection that whether he worked as Secretary in QQSUDA from the year 2009 to 2014 and not sustained.
22. Coming to the evidence of PW7 who is investigation officer in this case deposed the manner of the investigation done by him, Ex.P25 and 26 were marked through him. In the cross examination done by the learned counsel
for the Accused No.2 he stated that he has not examined PWs 5 and 6, not
collected the Vigilance report vide Ex.P19. He further stated that he has not collected any document to show that Accused No.2 abetted Accused No. 1 in submitting fake certificates before the concerned Department. PW7 stated in the cross examination done by the learned counsel for Accused No. 3, that he has not collected any specimen or sample seal of Andhra University and also collected sample certificates of the said university to which PW7 added that there is no necessity as such he has not collected the same. PW7 further stated that Ex.P13 to P17, P23 and P24 are received by him from PW1 as he handed over the same to him but the same is not stated by PW1 before him in his 161 Cr.P.C. Statement. He admitted that under Ex.P22 there is no
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 14 of 20
mention of the door number where he has conducted observation panchanama vide Ex.P22 also date and time.
23. The entire contention of the learned counsel for the Accused No.3 is that the prosecution has failed to prove that to whom the alleged certificates of Accused No.3 were handed over and the person who sent those certificates to the University for verification. But the contention of the learned counsel does not sustained since the prosecution has successfully proved all the charges framed against the Accused No.3 by its witnesses through their oral and documentary evidence, more particularly through
Ex.P19 coupled with Ex.P11, P13, P15, P16, P17, P18 and P24 beyond reasonable doubt. Through oral evidence i.e., testimony of PW1, PW2, PW5 and PW6 are corroborated with Ex.P13, P14 established the act of Accused
No.3 pertaining to his requisition before the Department by referring his educational qualification as required in Ex.P11.
24. The prosecution has failed to establish the case against Accused No. 2 that he has abetted Accused No. 3 to submit fake certificates before QQSUDA for getting promotion and there is no evidence adduced by the prosecution through its witness either oral or documentary to connect the case against
Accused No.2 for the offences punishable under Section 109 and 420 of IPC.
“Here it is pertinent to mention that
Section 109 of IPC: Punishment of abetment if the act abetted is
committed in consequence and where no express provision is made for its
punishment.—Whoever abets any offence shall, if the act abetted is
committed in consequence of the abetment, and no express provision is made
by this Code for the punishment of such abetment, be punished with the
punishment provided for the offence. Explanation.—An act or offence is said
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 15 of 20
to be committed in consequence of abetment, when it is committed in
consequence of the instigation, or in pursuance of the conspiracy, or with the
aid which constitutes the abetment. Illustrations
(a) A offers a bribe to B, a public servant, as a reward for showing A some
favour in the exercise of B’s official functions. B accepts the bribe. A has
abetted the offence defined in section 161.
(b) A instigates B to give false evidence. B, in consequence of the instigation, commits that offence. A is guilty of abetting that offence, and is liable to the same punishment as B.
(c) A and B conspire to poison Z. A in pursuance of the conspiracy, procures
the poison and delivers it to B in order that he may administer it to Z. B, in
pursuance of the conspiracy, administers the poison to Z in A’s absence and
thereby causes Z’s death. Here B is guilty of murder. A is guilty of abetting
that offence by conspiracy, and is liable to the punishment for murder.
CLASSIFICATION OF OFFENCE Punishment—Same as for offence abetted—
According as offence abetted is cognizable or non-cognizable—According as
offence abetted is bailable or non-bailable—Triable by court by which offence
abetted is triable—Non-compoundable.
Section 420 of IPC: Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of
property.—Whoever cheats and thereby dishonestly induces the person de-
ceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy the
whole or any part of a valuable security, or anything which is signed or
sealed, and which is capable of being converted into a valuable security, shall
be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may
extend to seven years, and shall also be liable to fine.
Section 468 of IPC: Forgery for purpose of cheating.—Whoever commits
forgery, intending that the 1[document or electronic record forged] shall be
used for the purpose of cheating, shall be punished with imprisonment of
either description for a term which may extend to seven years, and shall also
be liable to fine.
Section 471 of IPC: Using as genuine a forged 1[document or electronic
record].—Whoever fraudulently or dishonestly uses as genuine any
1[document or electronic record] which he knows or has reason to believe to
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 16 of 20
be a forged 1[document or electronic record], shall be punished in the same
manner as if he had forged such 1[document or electronic record].
25. Ex.P11 to P21 corroborates the testimony of PW1, PW2, PW4 to PW7 without any discrepancies and contradictions with each other. Thus the
Accused No.3 is liable for convection for cheating QQSUDA, by fabricating the exhibits under Ex.P14 for getting promotion as there is condition vide Ex.P11 thereby he has used the certificates covered under Ex.P14 to conform his promotion thereby he committed the offences punishable under sections 468
IPC and 471 of IPC. Here in the case on hand the Accused No. 3 has committed the offences under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of IPC and they are interlinked. The prosecution case is corroborated by the testimony of PW1 to 7 compelled with documentary evidence i.e., P11 to P22 and Ex.P24 beyond reasonable doubt. Accordingly, point is answered by convicting the Accused
No.3 and by acquitting the Accused No. 2 as the evidence available on record is not sufficient to connect the case against him.
The accused No.3 is heard under Section 248 (2) of Cr.P.C. on question of quantum of sentence for which he stated that Police intentionally filed this case, he is innocent and he has to lookafter of his family members and pleaded for mercy, this court has does not taken any lenient view since the offences are serious in nature.
VIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,
HYDERABAD
26. POINT No. 2:In the result,
Accused No. 2 is found not guilty for the offences punishable under sections 420 and 109 of Indian Penal Code, accordingly, he is acquitted for the said offences under section 248 (1) of Cr.P.C. the bail bonds of Accused
No. 2 shall discharge after expiry of appeal period. No property as to order.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 17 of 20
Accused No. 3 is found guilty for the offences under section 420, 468, 471 of Indian Penal Code. The Accused No. 3 is convicted for the said offences under section 248 (2) of Cr.P.C. The Accused No. 3 is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay fine of
Rs.10,000/- (Rupees ten thousand only) for the offence punishable under section 420 of Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine amount, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month, sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees one thousand only) for the offence punishable under section 468 of of Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine amount, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month, and further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of 3 years and to pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) for the offence under section 471 of of Indian Penal Code, in default of payment of fine amount, he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. Total amount of fine is Rs. 30,000/- (Rupees thirty thousand only). No property as to order. There are no reasons to invoke the provisions of Probation of Offenders Act. On enquiry Accused reported that he has capacity to engage counsel for appeal. The above sentences are shall run concurrently. The bail bonds of the Accused No. 3 shall be in force till expiry of appeal period.
Typed to my dictation to Kum. A. Karthika Sandhya, Typist, corrected and
pronounced by me in the open court on this the 20th day of October, 2022.
VIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
HYDERABAD
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 18 of 20
APPENDIX OF EVIDENCE
WITNESSES EXAMINED
FOR PROSECUTION:
PW-1: Sri. Md. Zaheer/Defacto-Complainant
PW-2: Sri. B. Anjaiah/Witness
PW-3: Sri. K. Ramulu/Panch witness for Observation Panchanama
PW-4: S.V. Sudhakar Reddy/Furnished the verification report of Accused No.3
PW-5: Sri. O. Madhusudhan/Witness summoned vide Crl.M.P.No. 2239/2018
PW-6: Sri. N. Raghunandhan Rao/Witness summoned vide
Crl. M.P.No. 2239/2018
PW-7: Sri. K.S. Ravi/Investigation Officer
FOR DEFENCE
-NONE-
EXHIBITS MARKED
FOR PROSECUTION:
Ex.P1 is report
Ex.P2 is attested copy of promotion letter of Accused No. 1, from Chairman to Tracer.
Ex.P3 is attested copy of promotion letter of Accused No. 1 from Chairman to Draught man Gr-III.
Ex.P4 is Attested copy of requisition filed by Accused No. 1 to AE requesting for promotion from Draught man Gr-III to AE.
Ex.P5 is the attested copy of requisition filed by Accused No. 1 to Secretary by submitting the technical qualifications in Diploma in Civil
Engineering from Vinayaka Machine Research Foundation.
Ex.P6 is three certificates.
Ex.P7 is attested copy of requisition submitted by QQSUDA to the Registrar
VMRF deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu for verifications of certificates filed by Accused No. 1.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 19 of 20
Ex.P8 is the attested copy of reply submitted by VMRF deemed University,
Selam, Tamilnadu stating that the certificates submitted by Accused
No. 1 are fake.
Ex.P9 is attested copy of letter addressed by QQSUDA to Controller of examination, VMRF deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu.
Ex.P10 is Attested copy of report submitted by Controller of examination,
VMRF deemed University, Selam, Tamilnadu.
Ex.P11 is attested copy of proceedings of Accused No.3 promoting him from
Attender to Junior Assistant with a condition to complete the degree within five years.
Ex.P12 is attested copy of proceedings of Accused No.3 promoting him as
Junior Assistant to Senior Assistant.
Ex. P13 is the attested copy ofletter addressed by Accused No.3 for release of increment stating that he has qualified BA (Arts) from Andhra
University.
Ex.P14 is two certificates submitted by Accused No.3.
Ex.P15 is the attested copy of proceedings releasing the increment to
Accused No.3.
Ex.P16 is the attested copy of letter addressed to Registrar Andhra
University for verification of certificates submitted by Accused No.3.
Ex.P17 is the attested copy of Remainder letter submitted to Registrar
Andhra University.
Ex.P18 is the attested copy of report submitted by Registrar, Andhra
University.
Ex.P19 is the attested copy of Vigilance report.
Ex.P20 is the attested copy of directions given to PW1 by Principal
Secretary Government MA & UD Department.
Ex.P21 is the attested copy of proceedings of Accused No.3 promoting him as Senior Assistant to from Junior Assistant.
Ex.P22 is the attested copy of proceedings of Accused No.3 promoting him as Superintendent from Senior Assistant.
C. C. No. 109 OF 2016
page 20 of 20
Ex.P23 is Crime Details Form.
Ex.P24 is letter addressed by PW4 to the Sub-Inspector of Police,
Dabeerpura.
Ex.P25 is the FIR,
Ex.P26 is the reply from LW6/Rajan Kurian stating that the said certificates in the name of Accused No. 1 not issued by the university and it is fake.
FOR DEFENCE:
Ex.D1 is an application submitted by Accused No.1 before QQSUDA,
dated 23-12-2014.
Ex.D2 is requisition submitted by Accused No.1 to QQSUDA,
dated 05-09-2014.
Ex.D3 is Representation submitted to QQSUDA, dated 20-11-2010.
Material Objects Marked
-NIL-
VIII ADDL. CHIEF METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
HYDERABAD