JUDGMENT 1. The Appellant Yasin Akonda has been convicted by a unanimous verdict of the jury of offences under secs. 466 / 114 and 199 of the Indian Penal Code and has been sentenced to 5 years' rigorous imprisonment. It has been contended for the Appellant (1) that the facts alleged do not constitute an offence under either of those sections, and (2) that the Sessions Judge misdirected the jury. The case for the prosecution is that some person personated Pacha Sheikh before the Mahomedan Registrar of Marriages and thus obtained the registration of Pacha Sheikh's divorce from his wife, that the assumed Pacha Sheikh made his mark in the register and Osman Sarkar signed for him, and that the Appellant joined in the conspiracy and was not only present but told the Registrar that the man before him was Pacha Sheikh. Now neither under Act I of 1876 nor any other law was the Mahomedan Registrar of Marriages bound or authorized to receive the statements of the said persons in evidence. Therefore sec. 199, I.P.C., does not apply to the case. Sec. 466 is however applicable. The signature of the register was an act of forgery, and as the document is one of those mentioned in the said section, the person signing made himself liable for such offence. Whether the Appellant was guilty of abetment would depend chiefly on whether he knew that the man personated was not Pacha Sheikh or at least had no knowledge whether he was or not. The evidence on this point was we think fairly put to the jury and we think it conclusively shows that the Appellant joined in the conspiracy well knowing that the man was not Pacha Sheikh. In the result we set aside the conviction under sec. 199, but maintain that under sec. 466 / 114, I.P.C, and as the Appellant took quite a subsidiary part in the matter we reduce his sentence to three years' rigorous imprisonment.