Skip to content


Shaikh Noor Mohamad Shaikh Fazal Vs. the State of Maharashtra - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 203 of 1975
Judge
Reported inAIR1981SC297; 1980CriLJ1345
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC) - Sections 30, 465, 467 and 471
AppellantShaikh Noor Mohamad Shaikh Fazal
RespondentThe State of Maharashtra
Excerpt:
.....to pune university could not be described as valuable security within meaning of section 30 of code - conviction altered under section 471 read with section 405 of code - matter remanded to trial court to consider as provided in section 6 of act to consider whether appellant be given benefit of probation of good conduct under section 4 of act. - sections 7 & 13: [dr.arijit pasayat & asok kumar ganguly,jj] offence of acceptance of bribe it is accepted case of prosecution that money was recovered from open almirah of accused - no evidence to show how currency notes smeared with powder reached in almirah -trial court found that accusation was not established by prosecution -acquittal of accused by trial court upheld by high court held, not liable to be interfered with. - if the..........could be described as 'valuable security'' as the expression is defined in section 30 of the indian pens code, we, therefore, alter the conviction under the aforesaid sections to one under section 471 read with section 465 of the indian penal code. however, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we set aside the sentences passed against the appellant and remit the matter to the trial court to consider, as provided in section 6 of the probation offenders act, 1958, whether the appellant should be given the benefit of section 4 of the said act. if the trial court does not find it expedient to release the appellant on probation of good conduct under section 4 of that act, it should then pass proper sentences on the appellant for the offences of which the appellant.....
Judgment:

A.C. Gupta, J.

1. The appellant was convicted of offences under Sections 417, 420 read with Section 511 and Section 471 read with Section 467 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to various terms of imprisonment and fine for those offences. Having heard counsel for both sides we do not find any reason to disturb the order of conviction in respect of offences under Sections 417 and 420 read with Section 511 but as regards the offence under Section 471 read with Section 467, I.P.C. we do not think that the two certificates the appellant has been found t have forged to get admission in the Art and Commerce College affiliated to Poona University could be described as 'valuable security'' as the expression is defined in Section 30 of the Indian Pens Code, We, therefore, alter the conviction under the aforesaid sections to one under Section 471 read with Section 465 of the Indian Penal Code. However, having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case we set aside the sentences passed against the appellant and remit the matter to the trial court to consider, as provided in Section 6 of the Probation Offenders Act, 1958, whether the appellant should be given the benefit of Section 4 of the said Act. If the trial Court does not find it expedient to release the appellant on probation of good conduct under Section 4 of that Act, it should then pass proper sentences on the appellant for the offences of which the appellant has been found guilty. The fine imposed on the appellant, if paid, shall b refunded, The appeal is disposed of a above.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //