【 RNI-HIN/2013/51580 】
【 RNI-MPHIN/2009/31101 】
05 Dec 2022
Jabalpur: The Madhya Pradesh High Court recently observed that a marksheet cannot be considered to be a "valuable security" for the purpose of Section 467 IPC.
Placing reliance on the jurisprudence laid down in the subject matter concerned, Justice Sujoy Paul observed-
The Division Bench in the case of Mahendra Kumar Shukla (supra) has followed the ratio decidendi laid down by the Apex Court in Shriniwas Pandit Dharmadhikari vs. State of Maharashtra (1980) 4 SCC 551 and came to hold that mark-sheet is not a 'valuable security' within the meaning of Section 467 of the IPC. I am bound by the aforesaid judgment and in view of said judgment constraint to hold that the charge against the applicant under Section 467 of the IPC is not sustainable. Facts of the case were that the brother/co-accused of the Petitioner allegedly used Petitioner's marksheet as his own to secure a Government Job. Accordingly, the FIR was registered against the Petitioner and his brother, and the trial court framed charged against him under Sections 467, 468, 471 and120-B IPC. Aggrieved, the Petitioner filed the revision petition against the order of framing of charges. Examining the submissions of parties and documents on record, the Court found merit in the arguments put forth by the Petitioner. The Court noted that a marksheet cannot be considered to be a valuable security for the purpose of Section 467 IPC.
The Court also observed that the charges under Sections 467 and 471 IPC against the Petitioner could not stand ground since it was not the case of the Prosecution that he had either forged/tampered with the document or fraudulently used it to further his own gains-
Sections 468 and 471 begins with the expression 'whoever commits or whoever uses'. The intention of law makers is clear that these provisions are aimed against the person who has used the forged document as a genuine document. If the story of prosecution is accepted on its face value, it will be clear that there is no allegation against the present applicant that he has either tampered the document or fraudulently used this document for obtaining the employment or for any other purpose. The allegation is made against the co- accused Raghunath Patel that he has impostered himself as applicant and used educational qualification documents of present applicant.
With the aforesaid observations, the Court held that no case was made out against the Petitioner under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC and therefore, the impugned order was liable to be set aside.
Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the order of framing of charges against the Petitioner was quashed. The matter was remitted back to the trial court to reconsider as to whether any other charges could be framed against the Petitioner for his role in the alleged act.
मध्यप्रदेश जुर्मे वारदात गम्भीर अपराध
3 deaths recorded in the capital for 3 consecutive days due to Corona Virus
साल के पहले सवेरे को सलाम इन्साफ के पहले सूरज को सलाम
उमा शंकर गुप्ता ने कमलनाथ की लंबी उम्र की कामना की, आरोपों की झड़ी भी लगाई
नाबालिग़ को बहला फुसला फिर किया अपहरण,पुलिसखाने का खेमा हुआ सक्रिय!!
CM Shivraj hits on Bhopal police over liquor mafias evolving in the capita
MP High Court quashes FIR registered on chemist over garba post under IT sections
MP: Senior lawyer shoots himself with gun, declared dead
Ayushman Yojana fraud: FIR registered against GuruAshish Hospital of Bhopal for claiming benefits without admitting patients
दुर्गा उत्सव, ईद-मिलादुन्नबी के मौक़े पर सुरक्षा के मद्देनज़र CP दफ़्तर में बैठक हुई सम्पन्न!
TC posted at sagar railway station rapes women with no ticket, police hands accused to GRP
Indore police arrests sextortion couple along with gang , Mastermind the son of a CRPF officer
दूसरे प्रदेशों की तुलना में मध्यप्रदेश में शराब कि दुकानें कम, दुकानों की तादात बढ़ाने की तैयारी में सरकार
आईजी की पत्नी-साली को घर के नौकरों ने बनाया भोपाल में बंधक
स्कूल के नीचे बेक़री में लगी आग बाल-बाल बचे विद्यालय के बाल!!!
DSP Yogesh Kurchaniya Lokayukt named in FIR, blackmailed bank officer on the pretext of forged notice along with 2 other accused