Find a Lawyer

Criminal Appeal No. 55 of 1.976, decided on 10th December, 1983.

---S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537, Explanation-- Prevention of Corruption tact (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Using a forged document as genuine- -Joinder of two accused--Objection as to joinder not raised before Trial Court but raised first time-before High Court- No prejudice having been caused to accused on that account nor any occasion existed for creating confusion to mislead accused or to suffer any failure of justice--Objection in respect of joinder of accused, held, could not sustain in circumstances.

----S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S. 537, Explanation-- Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Counterfeiting documents--Accused forged University degrees and Result Card far himself, without having qualified these examinations, with help of co-accused, an employee of University--Testimony of evidence adequately bringing home guilt of accused--Conviction upheld.

---S. 471--Criminal Procedure Code (V of 1898), S: 537, Explanation-- Prevention of Corruption Act (II of 1947), S. 5(2)--Counterfeiting documents-- Co-accused a University employee having hand in conduct of examinations, forging university degree for himself and for sale after getting illegal gratification- -Co-accused having no explanation for Result Card sold by him--Specimen and routine writing of accused tallying with his signatures on Result Card--Expert opinion against him not shattered and accusation against him not seriously assailed- Guilt of accused adequately brought home against accused--Conviction and sentence maintained.

Ghulam Hussain Qureshi for Appellants.

Irshad Ahmed for the State.

Date of hearing: 6th November, 1983.

This criminal appeal is preferred by appellants Muhammad Ismail son of Ghulam Hussain, resident of Bhikike, Tehsil Pasrur, District Sialkot, and Muhammad Rashid son of Faiz Muhammad, resident of Gali No. 22, Qadir Park, Samanabad, Lahore, against their conviction in a corruption case decided by Ch. Mumtaz Muhammad Khan, the then Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore, vide his judgment dated 6-1-1976. Appellant Muhammad Ismail was awarded R.I. for 3 years with a fine of Rs.1,000 under section 471, P.P.C. read with section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and in default to further R.I. for 9 months. Likewise the other appellant Muhammad Rashid an official of the Punjab University, was sentenced to R.I. for 5 years with a fine of Rs.5,000 under section 468, P.P.C. read with section 5(2) of the Act, ibid, and in default to further R.I. for 1 year.

2. The precise allegation against Muhammad Ismail was that he forged for himself (i) a degree of B.A. Exh. P.A. on a Form which was then obsolete, (ii) a result card of B.Ed. Exh. P.M. in a colour other than the one prescribed, and (iii) another result card of M.A. Urdu, Exh. P.B., without having legally qualified these examinations. It was alleged that he forged these documents with the help of co-appellant Muhammad Rashid who was an employee of the Punjab University and then by using them he got higher scales, etc. from his employer, and the District Council, Sialkot.

3. Against the other appellant Muhammad Rashid, the allegation was that, he besides helping his co-appellant, had been selling such fake degrees, etc to people for monetary considerations. Result card for Matriculation Exh. P.C. relating to Muhammad Arshad in addition to two others, was sold by him to Liaqat Ali (P.W.4) for Rs.1,500. A B.A. degree Exh. P.O. was given by him to Muhammad Afzal, another such degree Exh. P.Q. was prepared by him for himself, and made applications Exhs. P.R. and P.S. respectively on 10-1-1969 and 3-4-1969 to the Food Department for a job showing himself either F.Sc. or B.A..

4. Both of them pleaded not guilty to the charges and were tried. The plea of appellant Muhammad Ismail at the close of the trial was that he had been falsely involved due to enmity with his colleagues like Ghulam Muhammad, etc. who were jealous of the results of his classes. The other appellant Muhammad Rashid explained that since police wanted to involve an official of the Punjab University, their eye fell on him and that he was made a scape-goat only to fulfil their requirement. No evidence was led in defence.

5. Counsel for the appellants strenuously contended that the joinder of the two accused-appellants was not warranted inasmuch as there was not indication if the two were acting in concert and that since the evidence produced against them was exclusive showing no nexus between them, the, trial was vitiated.

6. I am afraid, if the objection could be made at this stage as it was not raised before the trial Court. Explanation to section 537, Cr. P. C . will preclude the appellants to raise it now. Besides, in the charge framed against the appellant Muhammad Rashid, it was specifically provided that he had been selling fake degrees, etc. for illegal gratification not only to his co-accused Muhammad Ismail but also others. Even if, therefore, the evidence was missing to establish any sale of such documents by him to, his co-accused Muhammad Ismail, a clear mention in the charge that' he had been selling them to others was enough to make him understand what was the precise indictment against him. Thus, there was little occasion for creating any confusion to mislead them or to suffer any failure of justice. All the more the evidence being somewhat watertight against them individually, they were supposed to have met it, and in fact they did. It was wrong to contend that any prejudice was caused to them in this behalf.

7. On facts, it was abundantly shown by appellant Muhammad Ismail's colleagues like P.Ws. 2 and 3 that they knew for certain because he did not disclose his Roll No. in B.A. examination that the Degree which he carried was ingenuine. That is why they called upon the authorities again and again to see to it. P.W.7 Qamar Zaman, Assistant Controller of Examinations of the University of the Punjab, made the matter extremely clear in telling that the duplicate Degree Exh. P. A . held by the said appellant was bogus inasmuch as it was scribed on a Form which had been rendered obsolete since 1961, and was no more in use in the year to which it apparently related. He firmly deposed that it had never been issued by the University. He brought forth the result-sheet for the year 1961 which, according to him, contained bogus entries against serial No. 7998 and it did not bear the signatures of Prof. Abdul Hameed Sheikh. He explained that on the basis of these bogus entries in the result-sheet, a duplicate degree of B.A. was obtained by the appellant Ismail. Additionally, he averred that the degree itself did not bear the signatures of Siddique Ahmad Khan, Controller. Of course, he admitted that this appellant did qualify the B.Ed. examination, but the result card Exh.P.M. was not genuine especially when he having failed in B.A. was not eligible to qualify it. In regard to the result card Exh. P.B. of M.A. Urdu, he reiterated that the entry in the result-sheet was bogus as it did not bear the signatures of Prof. Abdul Hameed and further that the result card intended for another Roll No. viz. 6953 was misused by him against his own Roll No. 6956 by interpolating his own name. Although he was cross-examined at length but he affirmed that having worked with both the aforesaid officers of the University, he had sufficient knowledge of their signatures and could safely say that neither the result-sheet nor these testimonials bore their signatures. There was no reason why his testimony should be ignored altogether. His conviction was rightly recorded.

8. The case against the other appellant Muhammad Rashid is rather worse. He was an official of the Punjab University having had a hand in the conduct of examinations, etc. Qamar Zaman (P.W.7) in detail referred to other documents like Degrees Exhs. P.N. and P.O. and of course the appellant's own Degree Exh. P.Q. as all forged. Although he did not say in specific terms that they had been forged by the said appellant, yet in the typical circumstances of the case and more so by virtue of his appointment in the relevant office, a presumption arises that it was all his performance. It lay heavily on him to account for at least his own Degree Exh.P.Q. which did not tally with the result sheet where it was instead shown to belong to one Muhammad Rashid son of Jan Muhammad of Dera- Ghazi Khan. . He had absolutely no explanation in regard to the result card Exh. P.C. which he had sold for Rs.1,500 to Liaqat Ali (P.W.4). His specimen and routine writings were compared with his signatures on the, result card Exh . P. C . by the expert P. W .14. Those all tallied. It was hard to ignore this expert opinion which could not be shattered on any ground whatsoever. He did not seriously assail the accusation in regard to his own Degree Exh.P.Q. whose falsity transpired from his own applications Exhs. P.S. and P.R. wherein he within a span of four months showed him either a graduate or F.Sc. This conspicuous inconsistency in his own writing simply helped the prosecution to prove its case that he was a master-mind in counterfeiting such documents.

9. The other evidence examined by the prosecution may not be much in point but it does not help the appellants either, for the material already discussed above by itself quite adequately brings home the guilt against both of them. There is no merit in this appeal and the same is accordingly dismissed maintaining their conviction as also the sentences under the respective heads. Warrants of their arrest be sent to the District Magistrate and the S.P. concerned for their arrest and commitment to jail to serve out the remaining portion of their sentences.

M.Y.H Appeal dismissed.

Find a Lawyer Near You

Dealing with a matter like this? Connect with a verified advocate in your city — free on SJP Lawyers Directory.