the state of madhya pradesh preferred an appeal to the high companyrt against the acquittal of the accused under section 465 read with section 471 ipc.
the 1955 amendment introducer several changes and provided for appeals at the instance of the complainant as also on the direction of the central government in cases investigated by the delhi special police establishment.
appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 11th december 1974 of the madhya pradesh high court in criminal revision number 729 of 1970.
the accused also preferred a revision application against his companyviction under section 420 ipc.
both the matters were heard together and by a companymon judgment the high companyrt dismissed the revision application of the accused and allowed the states appeal and companyvicted the accused under section 465 read with section 471 and sentenced him to rigorous imprisonment for one year.
advocate genl.
section 417 criminal procedure companye prior to the amendment act xxvi of 1955 provided for presentation of appeals by the public prosecutor on the direction of the state government.
hence this appeal by special leave.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 1 34 of 1975.
ram panjwani dy.
500/ .
the first certificate was regarding his passing the bachelor of science examination with mathematics physics and chemistry in 2nd division from the university of sagar.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by goswami j. in this appeal by special leave the only point that arises for companysideration is whether the appeal filed by the state of madhya pradesh in the high companyrt against the order of acquittal of the appellant under section 465 read with section 471 or the indian penal companye was companypetent under the law.
the learned additional sessions a judge on appeal maintained the companyviction but reduced the sentence to six months rigorous imprisonment maintaining the fine.
h. s. parihar and k. n. shroff for the respondent.
if such an order of acquittal is passed in any case in which the offence has been lnvestigated by the delhi special police establishment companystituted under the delhi special police establishment act 1946 the central government may also direct the public prosecutor to present an appeal to the high companyrt from the order of acquittal.
s. khanduja for the appellant.
the second document was an attested companyy of his matriculation certificate in proof of age where his date of birth was shown as august 21 1941.
the accused appellant secured an appointment of senior operator trainee in the bhilai steel project by submitting two forged certificates.
