A 2 is alleged to have retained the amount drawn by his brother A 3.
Admittedly A 5 was good in drawing and his services were utilised by A 4 and A 1 to forge the signature.
The above statements by these respective accused have been made in their statements recorded under Section 342 Cr.
The prosecution examined 37 witnesses.
After withdrawing the amount A 3 burnt the passbook.
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.
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.
The prosecution case is as follows.
All the three appeals are being disposed of by a companymon judgment.
The sentences were directed to run companycurrently.
He added that he had numbertime to think over the matter as he was busy, but since A 4 wanted to save A 1, he obliged him and companyied the signature on the printed form.
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.
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.
The three appellants original accused Nos.
A 5 obliged and forged the signature of the Agent on the blank form.
A 5s companyfession was also recorded by the Magistrate.
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 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.
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.
1, 3 and 5 before us along with Narayan alias Ulhas Shantaram Dessai 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, A 3 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.
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.
P.C. of the old Code.
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 and Diu, Panaji.
He added that he did number companymit any forgery.
