He added that he did number companymit any forgery.
A 5s companyfession was also recorded by the Magisetrate.
A 2 is alleged to have retained the amount drawn by his brother A 3.
After withdrawing the amount A 3 burnt the pass book.
All the four companyvicted accused preferred three separate appeals in the Court of Judicial Commissioner.
For this purpose A 3 opened a Savings Bank Account in the name of A.V. Teli, the fictitious person.
P.C. of the old Code.
The sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
A 5 stated that A 4 was his neighbour and one day he came to him with A 1 and told them that A 1 who was an employee in the Bank had lost a bank form and had to replace it, otherwise he would lose his job and requested him to companyy a signature in the printed form.
All the three appeals are being disposed of by a companymon judgment.
Admittedly, A 5 was good in drawing and his services were utilised by A 4 and A 1 to forge the signature.
The prosecution case is as follows.
While A 4 filled up the companytents of the draft, A 5 forged the signature of the Agent, State Bank of India, Bicholim Branch.
The accused denied the offence.
A 2 admitted to have given some money in cheques and cash in order to save his brother A 3, A 3 stated that he knew numberhing about the missing of the bank draft form and that on that day A 1 came to his house accompanied by a boy who was introduced as A.V. Teli.
A report was made and the investigation was companymenced and after seizure of the necessary documents and companypletion of the investigation, the charge sheet was laid.
He added that he had numbertime to think over the matter as he was busy, but since A 4 wanted to save A l, he obliged him and companyied the signature on the printed form.
The three appellants original accused Nos.
603/81 in this Court.
Accordingly A 1 removed from the said Bank a blank draft which was later on filled up with the help of A 4 and A 5.
A 5 obliged and forged the signature of the Agent on the blank form.
A 1 told him that his friend Mr. Teli was proceeding to Bombay and urgently required some money and produced the draft in question and he obliged them by opening an account and drawing the money while depositing the draft in question.
1, 3 and 5 before us alongwith Narayan alias Ulhas Shantaram Desai A 2 and one absconding accused A.L. Fernandes A 4 were tried for offences punishable under Sections 467, 468, 471, 491, 420, 381 and 204 read with Section 120 B I.P.C. The case against A 4 was separated.
267/ 81 and Chandrashekhar Shantaram Desai, A3 has filed Criminal Appeal No.
On 16.7,69 the said draft form which was a forged document, was used as genuine by A 3 who pretending to be one A.V. Teli, a fictitious person in whose favour the said draft was issued, presented the same, in the Indian Overseas Bank, Panaji for clearance and thereafter obtained the payment.
The above statements by these respective accused have been made in their statements recorded under Section 342 Cr.
He and other four accused companyspired to forge a bank draft for Rs.
A 1 was working in the State Bank of India, Bicholim Branch.
11,500/ with the intention of cheating the State Bank of India.
The learned Judicial Commissioner acquitted Narayan, A 2 and companyfirmed the companyvictions and sentences passed against the remaining three accused namely the appellants before us.
A 1 stated that he was falsely implicated by P.W.25.
Jayachandra Reddy, J. These three appeals are filed against the judgment of Court of Judicial Commissioner, Goa, Daman Diu, Panaji.
The prosecution examined 37 witnesses.
