The State of Maharashtra vs Maoji Nainsi Jain and Others

S.R. Dongaonkar, J.—This appeal of the appellant -State takes exception to the judgment of acquittal of the respondents, for the offences punishable u/s 120(b), 467, 468, 472, 474 and 420 read with section 120(b) of the Indian Penal Code.

The respondents including Ajaykumar Surajprasad Yadav[Respondent no.12 deleted as per order dated 9.12.1991], then accused no.13, were prosecuted for the offences in Session Trial No.69/1989, before the Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal. The prosecution case in nutshell was that in the year 1978-79 State of Maharashtra was implementing a scheme by name Employment Guarantee Scheme (For short E.G.S.). The said scheme was in link with the scheme of UNESCO of the provision of food for all and CARE [Cooperative for American Relief to everywhere] was also part of the said scheme by which coupons used to be received in the Collector Offices, E.G.S. Branch including that of Yavatmal. These coupons used to be for the denominations of Rs.1/-, 2/-, or 5/-. It is alleged that the number of these coupons used to be entered into the registers maintained for that purpose in the Collector Office. These coupons used to be then distributed to the E.G.S. Implementing Agencies such as Executive Engineer, Minor Irrigation, Soil Conservation Officer etc. in district Yavatmal. After doing labour work these coupons used to be given to the labourers at various sites under the said scheme in lieu of part of wages. It was expected of the labourers to tender those coupons in the Fair Price Shops [Ration Shops]. They used to receive wheat to the extent of denominations of the coupons. They were not required to pay any money for the purchase of this wheat as the same was being paid through reimbursement of the coupon by the Collector Office. The Fair Price Shop owners used to collect these coupons, stamp them as ''cancelled'' and used to submit these coupons with the relevant statement to the respective tahsil office in E.G.S. Form I. In the tahsil Office these coupons used to be checked and the statement in EGS Form No II used to be filled in. Bills for reimbursement were used to be prepared and thereafter the payments through cheques were to be made to the Fair Price Shop Owners. They used to get these payments from Treasury by following usual procedure. Thereafter, coupons so collected by the tahsil Office used to send it to District Supply Officer, and in the present case to D.S.O. Yavatmal. The same used to be again checked and verified about the correctness regarding the amounts of payments as well as quantity of wheat that was supplied. When the scheme was in progress, in various districts including Yavatmal, one news item came to be published in daily news paper. Tarun Bharat" some time on 27.3.1979 that there are bogus coupons in circulation. Staff members in the District Supply Office and E.G.S. Office Yavatmal were put to on guard. As such they started verifying the coupons meticulously. It was noticed that some coupons of YC Series above the numbers 6,00,000/-were received in tahsil office from F.P.S. Owners. They also noticed that coupons of YC Series above the numbers 6,00,000/-were never received by the Collector Office, Yavatmal. Therefore, it was suspected that the some of the coupons were bogus and forged. It was also found that some of the coupons were in duplicate i.e. to mean two or more coupons of the same numbers. After coming to notice of such instances, D.S.O. Shri V.M. Sambre lodged report to Police Station Yavatmal City, on 4.4.1979. Crime No.188/1979 under sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code was registered. Investigation was commenced. P.I. Nawalsingh Patil took search of F.P.S. of accused i.e. respondent no.1 Maroti. It is alleged that one coupon bearing No. YC -560501, some more coupons of 1 and 2 Kgs. wheat, a number of rubber stamps were found. Accused were arrested on the following day. Police authorities also searched the shops of other accused [F.P.S.] and seized some of the coupons which were allegedly fake. They had also seized some documents, blocks, negatives, rubber stamps etc. The seizures of some registers, files etc. were also carried out. It is alleged that Shri V.M. Sambre had detected five coupons of each F.P.S. of the accused alleging that they were fake and five other coupons which were genuine were collected. I.O. Shri Varhade had also seized some bundles of coupons from the office of D.S.O. Yavatmal. On 15.7.1979 accused no.13 [now approver] Ajay Kumar Yadao was arrested. He was produced before C.J.M. Yavatmal. He made his confessional statement u/s 164 Cr.P.C. before the learned C.J.M. It is alleged that seized fake coupons and other articles were sent to C.A. Nagpur. Some information was also supplied to him. His reports were received. It is alleged that it was transpired in the investigation that the respondent no.1-Maoji with the help of respondent no.7 Shivshankar and said Ajaykumar Yadav had got fake coupons printed and they had circulated the same in the offices so as to cause their distribution to the labourers. It was also alleged that the fake coupons were to the tune of the cash of Rs.4, 20,808.38 p.s. Thus they had cheated the government. Some role was alleged against each of the respondents including that of Ajaykumar Yadav, then accused no.13, contending that these accused had cheated the government by preparing false, bogus coupons causing their circulation, and getting their encashment and as such they were charge sheeted for the aforesaid offences in the court of C.J.M. Yavatmal. Case was pending in the court of C.J.M. Yavatmal for quite a long time since 1981 to 1989. It was bearing Criminal Case No. 16/1981. It is alleged that during the pendency of the case, Ajaykumar Yadav expressed his willingness to depose the true facts before the court as an approver, so pardon was tendered to him and his statement was recorded on 29.4.1989. Thereafter learned C.J.M. committed the case to the court of sessions vide his order dated 3.6.1989 upon which the respondents were tried for the said offences in Sessions Trial No.60/1989.

Charge for the relevant offence was framed against them. The same was explained. They pleaded not guilty. Their defence is that of total denial.

Prosecution has examined in all 35 witnesses in order to establish the guilt of the accused. It has also adduced considerable documentary evidence on record including the alleged fake coupons, registers from the F.P.S. of the accused, purchase registers, documents showing purchase of stationary, government office registers etc. Rubber stamps, negatives, blocks etc. were also produced on record. Evidence of approver i.e. Ajaykumar Yadao was adduced, who happened to be alleged witness to conspiracy to the alleged scam of fake coupons for getting money from the government offices. Actual preparation of these fake coupons, was by the accused no.1 Maoji and others. Oral evidence of shop keepers, to prove the purchase of stationary by respondent no.1 with help of the said approver Ajaykumar Yadao, preparation of block and rubber stamp etc. was also led.

The categories of the prosecution witnesses, can be noted here. P.W. 1 Narsinh Dande, P.W. 4 Waman Patekar, P.W. 8 Ajab Metange, P.W. 10 Yadao Tale, P.W. 18 Baldeo Shete, P.W. 22 Gurumukh Hemrajani, P.W. 23 Prabhakar Dharaskar, P.W. 24 Devidas Chirade, P.W. 30 Bhimrao Harne and P.W. 33 Keshao Ambulkar are the government officers. They are also on the point as to what numbers of coupons were received by the government offices for distribution and for what amount they had in fact received during the course of scam also what coupons were received by the government offices to show discrepancy and to establish the fact that some of the coupons were fake coupons which were not received for distribution but against which wheat was distributed and reimbursement was claimed.

Next set of the prosecution witnesses is of panch witnesses namely P.W.3 Shamrao Pachkawade, P.W. 5 Vithal Raptiwar, P.W. 6 Shankar Chiwarkar, P.W. 7 Marotrao Patil , P.W. 20 Rameshchandra Agrawal , P.W. 25 Vijay Pande, P.W. 26 Mohammad Ataur Rehman s/o Abdul Samad and P.W. 28 Manohar Jain, who are panch witnesses to the seizures of the documents etc.

The other group of witnesses is of the rubber stamp makers, the vendors of stationary articles which include witness P.W. 11 Ram Budhwani, P.W. 12 Ghanshyam Kothari, P.W. 13 Krishna Deshmukh, P.W. 14 Mohij Husen Mohd. Ali, P.W. 16 Bhalchandra Chiddarwar, P.W. 21 Yadao Lakhdive, P.W. 27 Baliram Vbaidya, P.W. 29 Bajranglal Agrawal and P.W. 32 Chaganlal Agrawal.

The other group of witnesses is the owner of the house of respondent Maoji in whose house; it is alleged; fake coupons were printed. So also there is evidence of other shop keepers whom the said coupons were distributed. P.W. 17 Rajendrasingh Thakur, P.W. 19 Sudam Dighade and P.W. 15 Akhtar Husen Akbar Ali.

The next category of the witnesses is of Police Officers namely P.W. 2 P.S.I. Deonarayan Tiwari, P.W. 31 P.I. Vasant Sopale, P.W. 34 P.I. Nawalsingh Patil and P.W. 35 P.S.I. Ramdas Varhade. Needless to mention that the main evidence i.e. led by the prosecution is that of the approver who is P.W. 9 Ajaykumar Yadao. He has been examined to prove the modus operendi of the respondents and the extent of distribution of fake coupons, receipts thereof and also amounts involved in the scam.

The accused did not adduce any evidence in defence.

Learned trial Judge held that the nature of the process in commission of crime is almost not disputed and it is established as summarized above. He also found that there was news item published. Consequent checking as well as verification of the coupons took place. He has found that the pardon granted to accused Ajay Kumar Yadao, then accused no.13, though, some of the aspects were missing; was valid. He however, found on the facts which had come on record that his evidence is not trustworthy, in order to lead to any inference against accused. He held that the evidence of the shop keepers by whom the alleged stationary was seized does not lead to positive inference that the fake coupons prepared out of the stationary purchased and in fact it is not established that Ajaykumar Yadao or respondent no.1 Maoji was any way involved in the purchase of the same. he specifically found that though the scam appears to be of worth four lacks which was quite a large sum, in the year when these offences were alleged committed, the printing of fake coupons to that extent and circulation thereof was almost impossible. He also found that the investigating agency has failed to prove the conspiracy hatched by the respondents as alleged and further that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove as to coupons of what number were supplied to various Collector offices in Maharashtra by the office at Mumbai to establish that the coupons which were seized and alleged to be fake coupons, were not the coupons supplied by the central office. He further held that as it was the duty of the F.P.S. Owner to honour the coupons and there was no machinery available for them to find out that as to which coupons were forged or bogus, after receiving those coupons; getting reimbursement of money from the government offices on them could not be an offence. He specifically found that I.O. had no test to apply to find out as to which of the coupons were the genuine and which were fake. After the elaborate consideration of the evidence and considering the possible inferences, he found that the prosecution has failed to establish the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubts and therefore, even if there was a racket operating for printing of fake coupons and government was duped to the tune of rupees four lacks, perhaps in connivance with some government officers in the department, the respondents cannot be held guilty and accordingly he rendered the judgment of acquittal of the respondents on 30.5.1991. It needs to be noted that approver Ajaykumar Yadao was held to have been granted valid pardon.

This judgment of acquittal is challenged in this appeal.

Learned A.P.P. for the state has submitted that the prosecution has proved the case beyond reasonable doubts by adducing all the evidence on record which categorically shows that the respondent no.1 Maoji had printed said fake coupons and distributed the same through the various agencies which were in turn supplied to the labourers, they were tendered to the F.P.S. owners and thereafter reimbursements were obtained by them. Further, he has submitted that the evidence of approver is cogent and sufficient to implicate the respondents to find them guilty. It is his submission that the evidence of this Ajaykumar Yadao clearly leads to the inference that the respondent no.1 Maoji had asked him to purchase relevant stationary, he purchased the same and therefore, respondents have to be held guilty. Further according to him, the owner of the rented house taken by respondent no.1 Maoji for preparation of these fake coupons has been examined and the learned trial Judge has wrongly considered the evidence of the witnesses to find the respondents not guilty. According to him, learned trial Judge has come to wrong conclusions on the facts and circumstances of the case and the judgment of the learned trial Judge suffers with perversity. It is against provisions of law and therefore, the respondents need to be held guilty, more so, because it was a big scam. According to him, the conspiracy in duping the government by circulation of false coupons has been established and therefore, when the fake coupons did not tally with the genuine coupons, their numbers were not tallying with the coupons originally distributed through the government offices, the respondents have to be held guilty. According to him; the judgment of acquittal of the respondents need to be set aside, so as to do justice and there are compelling reasons for doing so.

As against this, learned Counsel for the respondents has contended that the judgment of the learned trial Judge is correct. Merely on suspicion , respondents can not be held guilty. Evidence of P.W. 9 Ajaykumar Yadao [approver] was rightly disbelieved by the learned trial Judge and as his evidence did not prove the prosecution case, rest of the evidence as it is not directly linking Respondent/ Accused with the offence committed, the respondents cannot be held guilty. In short, he submitted that the judgment rendered by the learned trial Judge is correct and it is not liable to be set aside.

As this Court is dealing with the judgment of acquittal in appeal, observations of the Apex Court in AIR 2007 SCW 1850, [Chandrappa and Ors. v. State of Karnataka] are attracted. They are quoted below:

(1) An appellate Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded;

(2) Criminal P.C. puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate Court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on question of fact and of laws;

(3) Various expressions, such as, ''substantial and compelling reasons'', ''good and sufficient grounds'', ''very strong circumstances'', ''distorted conclusions'', ''glaring mistakes'', etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of ''flourishes of language'' to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate Court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the Court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.

(4) An appellate Court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further inforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by trial Court. (5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court.

Therefore, it is necessary to find out as to whether the judgment of the learned Trial Judge is perverse to the record or his inferences are totally unsustainable at law and whether there are compelling reasons to overturn the said judgment in respect of all or any of the accused.

It is obvious that the allegations against the respondents levelled by the prosecution are quite serious. Prosecution has led the evidence of approver. In the present case the question is whether that evidence takes us to the finding of guilt of the respondents with the corroboration in material particulars.

P.W. 9 Ajaykumar Yadao, states his occupation to be Peon in Municipality. He has deposed about whole of the procedure followed involving the respondents in the alleged circulation of the fake coupons and claiming reimbursement for the same. The tune of the amount is alleged to be about four lacks. Learned trial Judge has considered the printing, distribution, collection and reimbursement of these fake coupons to this tune as an impossibility. It is to be noted that the learned trial Judge has found that for getting reimbursement of such a large amount, there should be circulation of about more than two lacks coupons, which is almost an impossibility vis-a-vis the evidence adduced by the prosecution through the purchase of the stationary and printing thereof. As this is the opinion of trial court it is necessary to find out whether this inference can be said to be unsustainable.

For that it is necessary to see the cross examination of this witness. It is necessary to bear in mind that this witness had given confessional statement before the Magistrate and thereafter he had become approver. Cross examination of this witness shows that he is residing at Yavatmal since birth. His proximity to respondent Maoji was shown because his house and F.P.S. of respondent Maoji situated in Athawadi Bazar. It is not clear as to how such proximity would make him to take help of this Ajaykumar Yadao in printing, circulation, getting reimbursement of the said fake coupons. He does not seem to be related with him. He appears to be only a Peon. Therefore, unless he is shown to be such acquainted with respondent no.1 Maoji, it is difficult to digest a case that he would help respondent Maoji in committing such offence. No doubt he has stated to have been working in Printing press earlier, but that fact by itself would not lead to the conclusion that this Ajaykumar Yadao would help him in committing such a serious offence.

It also appears that there are some contradictions in his evidence and the statement recorded by learned C.J.M. after tendering him pardon and in confession too. It is also brought on record that there is discrepancy about the block and its use while printing the fake coupons. In cross examination, he has further stated that he used to work in double shift in Municipality Yavatmal. The timings of his working which has come in cross examination would show that there would have been almost no time for him to assist respondent Maoji in committing said offence i.e. printing of fake coupons right from purchase of stationary , preparation of block etc. and distribution of the same.

As such ex-facie the evidence of approver Ajay Kumar Yadao does not seem to be sufficiently cogent for coming to the conclusion about the conspiracy hatched by the respondents.

Learned trial Judge has given cogent reasons for disbelieving the evidence of the approver. As the learned trial Judge has not relied the evidence of approver on merits, we also do not think it necessary to go into the aspect of non-tendering legal pardon to this witness. Suffice it to say that the reasons recorded by the learned trial Judge for not believing his evidence, cannot be said to be perverse to the record inasmuch as the same are supported by evidence of witnesses of the shop keepers of the stationary, stamp makers and others.

To illustrate by way of an example, evidence of P.W. 11 Ram Chandiram Budhwani P.W.27 Baliram Vaidya can be seen. P.W. 11 Ram Budhwani is the owner of the Printing Press at Amravati. He stated about the negative of the block having prepared in his press. He had also deposed about the seizure of negative and bill books etc. In cross examination he stated that he cannot tell exactly on what particular date who had come for placing the orders. He further stated that he does not preserve the negatives for a long time. He does not maintain any account of the orders received in his shop, blocks supplied etc. He also stated in cross examination that he did not remember if the police had asked him to identify the person who had placed the order and obtained the delivery of the block. He also stated that he did not ask the man who had come to place the order as to why he was getting such block prepared. If such is the evidence, it can not be held that either approver or respondent no.1 Maoji had got prepared that objectionable negative or block for printing fake coupons and if at all they had done so, it is not on record why P.W. Ram Budhwani was not made an accused.

Turning to the evidence of P.W. 17 Baliram Vaidya who has alleged to have prepared the rubber stamp. He stated that he used to receive the orders from one Chaganlal Ramgopal. He used to give him commission for getting such orders. In1978 he had received an order through Chaganlal Ramgopal and police had come to his factory for enquiry. He produced the register having the impressions of rubber stamp prepared by him. The same was seized. A note is appended to his evidence by learned trial Judge, that the register having the impression of rubber stamps which was seized from the factory of this witness, could not be shown to him as it was not traceable. In such circumstances, his evidence hardly carry any value because he is unable to state as to what type of stamp was prepared by him and whether it was the same used in the process of instant scam. Same is the type of evidence of other witnesses also.

Learned trial Judge has observed that the I.O. Varhade had clarified that he had never gone to Bombay to verify if the coupons of those numbers [i.e. numbers of fake coupons] were printed or distributed or not. According to learned trial Judge this was an important lacuna. We find it difficult to disagree with him. Learned trial Judge has inferred that unless it is established that the fake coupons bearing numbers which were recovered in this case and alleged to be fake coupons were not distributed at all by the Central office in this or to the adjoining districts, their infiltration in the district Yavatmal cannot be ruled out. It is difficult to say that this inference is perverse. It was for the prosecution to clearly establish that the alleged fake coupons found in this case, were not at all distributed by the Central Office at Bombay either in Yavatmal District or in adjoining districts, so as to exclude the possibility of their infiltration in Yavatmal District and further to show that these coupons were fake coupons noticeable so by F.P.S. owners and by the government offices in due course. The very fact that reimbursements were issued on these coupons show that either they could not have been found to be suspicious or there was conspiracy with the government officers also in this scam. Thus the conclusion that these coupons were fake coupons and the respondents only were responsible for the same cannot be drawn beyond doubt.

Learned trial Judge has clearly opined that it was impossible to print such a large number of fake coupons and distribute the same as alleged in the prosecution case. Such a view cannot be said to be unwarranted. He has rightly found that there has to be number of rubber stamps and if they are prepared by many persons, there would have at least been some difference in their prints and therefore, the things alleged by the prosecution are not proved to definite extent as required, for establishing the guilt of the respondents in criminal trials.

Leave all this apart, during the course of hearing we expressed to see the muddemal in the present case, particularly to know as to what was the difference between the genuine coupons and fake coupons, but none of coupons could be produced on record. Only one block was produced vide letter of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Yavatmal who had informed that thee was only one block available as muddemal in the present case and therefore, this Court could not verify as to which coupons were fake and which were genuine and whether there was any remarkable difference between the same so as to know by lay man as to which coupons were fake but we could not get that opportunity, the result would then be obvious.

Considering the totality of the circumstances and material available on record, particularly in view of the fact that the evidence of approver -Ajaykumar Yadav, does not establish the guilt of the accused conclusively, vis-a-vis the other evidence led by the prosecution, the impugned judgment of trial Judge can not be said to be perverse. It is further not possible to hold that there are any compelling reasons to overturn the same, since the judgment of the learned trial Judge can not be said to be unreasonable or illegal. The appeal is therefore, dismissed.