Abdur Rahim, J.
1. There can be no doubt that the facts alleged against the accused do not constitute an offence under Sections 419 and 511 Indian Penal Code, as it is not alleged that his attempt to get himself re-instated in the post of the Karnam by the production of a certificate of having passed a certain examination and representing that the certificate referred to him while in fact it referred to another man bearing the same name caused or was likely to cause damage or harm to the officer to whom the representation was made either in body, mind, reputation or property within the moaning of Section 415, Indian Penal Code. The conviction and sentence must be set aside and the fact that the accused pleaded guilty to the charge can, of course, make no difference I am not sure that the facts proved might not amount to an offence under Section 182, Indian Penal Code, as held in the similar case of Queen Empress v. Ganesh Khanderaso and Ganesh Doulath 13 B. 506 But having regard to the term of imprisonment already undergone by the accused, the interest of justice do not require that the question, whether he could be properly convicted under any other section of the Penal Code, should be considered. The accused must, therefore, be immediately set at liberty.