The High Court
Case Details
Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 1 - Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 Lalit Mohan Majhi ---------- -Versus- … Petitioner The State of Jharkhand … Opp. Party With Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 Manik Chandra Pramanik The State of Jharkhand ------------ -Versus- ---------- …. Petitioner ….. Opp. Party CORAM:
Legal Reasoning
HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH For the Petitioner(s) : Mr. Navneet Sahay, Advocate ---------- (Cr. Revision No.1438/2015) Mr. Ram Chandra Prasad Sah, Advocate (Cr. Revision No.1543/2015) For the State : A.P.P --------- C.A.V On : 22.02.2023 Pronounced On : 24.06.2023 Heard the parties. The petitioner Lalit Mohan Manji in Cr. Revision no.1438/2015 and petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik in Cr. Revision No.1543/2015 have filed these revision applications against the judgment dated 16.10.2015 passed by Sri Anil Kumar Mishra No.1, learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Seraikella-Kharsawan in Cr. Revision No.33 of 2011/ Cr. Appeal No.41 of 2011, whereby and wherein, the learned Additional Sessions Judge-III, Seraikella-Kharsawan dismissed the appeal of the petitioners and affirmed the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 28.04.2011, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seraikella in connection with Ichagarh P.S. Case No.35 of 2005 corresponding to G.R Case No.569 of 2005, holding the petitioners guilty for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and thereby sentencing them to undergo R.I. for one year each for the offences under Sections 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I for two years each for the offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. All the sentences were ordered to run Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 2 - concurrently. No fine was imposed on the petitioners as the money which was fraudulently withdrawn had already been deposited. The prosecution case was instituted on the basis of the written report of the informant Ratni Manjhain who is a widow lady, alleging therein that 03 acres of her land was acquired by the Government for construction of Chandil Dam. Rs.75,000/- was to be paid to her by way of compensation against the acquisition of land and Rs.50,000/- was to be given to her for constructing a house in another location. The petitioner Lalit Mohan Manji is her brother-in-law. The petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi alongwith Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee assured her that they will get the compensation amount released from the State Government. After considerable period of time, when the compensation amount was not released to her, she started inquiring as to what was the reason for delay and came to know that the Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee had withdrawn Rs.50,000/- which was to be given to her for constructing a house vide Cheque No.8310361 dated 27.11.2004. She has further alleged that not only this, the petitioner Lalit Mohan Maji in collusion with Bhuwan Banerjee, villager chowkidar Sudhir Tanti and Panchayat Sewak Manik Chandra Pramanik got her fake death certificate issued on 21.06.2005 for withdrawing the remaining amount of Rs.75,000/-. In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and documentary evidence. On the basis of the evidence available on record, both the learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court have come to a concurrent finding regarding the guilt of the petitioners. It appears that Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee in collusion with co-accused Guhi Majhi got a fake account opened in the name of the informant and her deceased husband, in which, cheque amount of Rs. 50,000/- was deposited and the same was withdrawn. Abhijit Mukherjee P.W.1 is the then Branch Manager of Gramin Bank, Khunti Branch. He has stated that on 29.11.2004, Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee, Som Manjhi and Ratni Manjhain had come to his bank and filled a form for opening a bank account in the name of a displaced persons namely Som Maji and Ratni Manjhain. After seeing their card which was issued to them, showing them as a displaced persons, their Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 3 - bank account was opened on the identification of the said Mukhiya. He has further stated that the money was deposited in the account and the same was withdrawn on several dates. He has proved the bank account opening form which is Exhibit-1. He has identified the Mukhiya in the dock and Guhi Majhi as the person who had impersonated as Som Manjhi. It is pertinent to mention that the Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee died during the course of trial and Guhi Manjhi is not the petitioner before us. The bank opening form is Exhibit-1. Ratni Majhain P.W.5 has supported her case as made out in the written report and stated that Guhi Majhi, Sumi, Lalit Majhi and Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee and Gram Sewak Manik Chandra Pramanik had conspired and withdrawn Rs.50,000/- which was allotted to her for constructing a house. The accused persons had procured a fake death certificate for withdrawing the said amount and the petitioners Lalit Mohan Manjhi and Manik Chandra Pramanik along-with other accused persons had signed for receiving Rs.50,000/-. She has further stated that her sister-in-law Sumi, wife of the petitioner Lalit Mohan Majhi had affixed her photograph in the bank opening form, while Guhi Majhi had affixed his photograph as her husband Som Majhi. Padamalochan Gope P.W.2 has supported the prosecution case and stated that the accused persons had withdrawn Rs.50,000/- by impersonating as the informant. Kartik Gope P.W.3 has also supported the prosecution case and had stated that the petitioners in conspiracy with other accused persons had withdrawn the compensation amount in the name of the informant. This witness in the cross-examination had stated that Guhi Majhi had deposited Rs.50,000/- which was the embezzled amount, in the court itself. Joytilal Majhi P.W.4 has supported the prosecution case and has stated that Lalit Mohan Majhi had impersonated himself as Som Majhi to withdraw the compensation amount. He had also stated that the compensation amount was withdrawn from bank by affixing fake photograph. He has been cross-examined at length. There is nothing in the cross-examination to doubt his veracity. Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 4 - Ambika Yadav P.W.6 has stated that he is the social worker and several cheques were handed over to the displaced persons in the Dak Bunglow near chandil station. Cheque of Rs.50,000/- in the name of Som Majhi was also handed over. At that time, Som Majhi was dead. Anil Yadav P.W.7 is the Investigating Officer of this case. He has stated that during the course of investigation, it had come to the light that the husband of the informant had died prior to this occurrence. It has also come to the light that the petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi in connivance with Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee alongwith others have submitted an application stating that the informant Ratni Majhain had died and the death certificate should be issued in her name. This petition was addressed to the Block Development Officer. He has proved his petition which is Exhibit-7. From perusal of Exhibit-7, it transpires that petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi is the first signatory and the Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee is the second signatory. Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee had given his certificate that the deceased had died. This certificate was also endorsed by the petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik who was a Gramin Sewak. Petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi had also signed on the paper as a receipt for receiving the fake death certificate of the informant, which is Exhibit-9. From perusal of which, it appears that the death certificate in the name of Ratni Majhain was issued by the petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik on 21.06.2005. This witness has stated that Manik Chandra Pramanik is a Gram Sewak and at the instruction of Block Development Officer, he had issued a death certificate. He had also stated that Manik Chandra Pramanik had no concern with the present case. From the aforesaid oral and documentary evidence, it is evident that the petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi in connivance with the deceased Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee and other accused persons had opened a fake bank account in the name of the informant and the deceased husband Som Manjhi. They obtained a cheque of Rs.50,000/- issued in the name of Som Manjhi and deposited it in the fake bank account which was opened by them and withdrew the amount. The prosecution has further been able to prove that the petitioner Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 5 - Lalit Mohan Manjhi had got the fake death certificate of the informant Ratni Majhain, issued from the Ichagarh Block by filing an application for issuance of the death certificate which was signed by him and endorsed by the Mukhiya Bhuwan Banerjee. As far as the petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik is concerned, he is said to have issued the fake death certificate of the informant Ratni Majhain. The Investigating Officer Anil Yadav P.W.7 has specifically stated that the death certificate has been issued by the petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik on the direction of the Block Development Officer and he had no concern with the present case. From the entire facts and circumstances, it is evident that apart from the statement of the informant that the petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik in Cr. Revision No.1543/2015 was one of the signatory for obtaining cheque from the Land Acquisition Officer, there is no material against him. The cheque receiving Memo has not been brought on record. The Investigating Officer Anil Yadav P.W.7 has specifically stated that the petitioner had no role in the occurrence of fake death certificate. As far as petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi in Cr. Revision No.1438/2015 is concerned, he in connivance with other co-accused persons had got a fake bank account opened in the name of the informant and her deceased husband. He had also signed the petition for procuring fake death certificate of the informant and he had received the fake death certificate. Considering this fact, I came to the finding that the prosecution has been able to prove its case against the petitioner Lalit Mohan Manjhi for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code beyond all reasonable doubts and the learned Trial Court as well as learned Appellate Court have rightly come to the concurrent finding regarding the guilt of the petitioner, considering the nature of offence. The sentence passed by the learned Trial Court is proportionate to the gravity of the offence. As far as petitioner Manik Chandra Pramanik in Cr. Revision No. 1543/2015 is concerned, the prosecution has not brought any evidence to show his complicity in the aforesaid offence. Accordingly, the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Trial Court Cr. Revision No.1438 of 2015 & Cr. Revision No.1543 of 2015 - 6 - holding him guilty for the offences under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code is hereby, set aside. Accordingly, Cr. Revision No.1438 / 2015 is dismissed & Cr. Revision No.1543/2015 is allowed.
Decision
Pending I.As, if any, also stand disposed of. BS/- (Ambuj Nath, J.)