JUDGMENT Nure Alam Chowdhury, J. This appeal on behalf of the Appellant Amulya Kr. Bala @ Amiya Kr. Bala a habilder of State Bank of India, Sainthia Branch, at the relevant time is directed against the judgment and order dated 15.3.88, passed by the Ld. Judge, Birbhum First Special Court at Suri in Special Court Case No. 6 of 1983 convicting the Appellant u/s. 420 IPC and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for 3 years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- i.d. to suffer R.I. for six months more but found him not guilty of the charges u/ss. 465/468/471 IPC and acquitted him of those charges. 2. Prosecution case, in short is that the Appellant, A habildar of State Bank of India, Sainthia Branch, applied for Leave Travel concession for, his Journey to Digha with the members of his family and applied for 15 days leave from 25.3.81 and prayed for advance and a sum of Rs. 675/ - was paid as advance on 23.3.81 and the Appellant submitted a bill for Rs. 1200/- on 24.7.81, supported by a receipt dated 3.6.81 showing payment of taxi fare of Rs. 1200/- in respect of the Journey in Taxi No. WGD 1722 for the period 26.3.81 to 29.3.81 and he was allowed a sum of Rs. 900/- and the balance sum of Rs. 225/- was credited in his Savings Bank Account No. P.S. 15. However on some complaint, an enquiry was made and it was found that the Appellant did not go to Digha and did not hire any taxi and the receipt filed by him regarding taxi fare is a fictitious one. 3. On such allegations the Appellant was placed on trial on the charges u/ss. 420, 465/468 and 471 IPC and convicted an sentenced as above by the Special Court. 4. The defence case was that the Appellant did not commit any offence and the Appellant had been to Digha with the members of his family mentioned in his application dated 24.7.81, took the advance of Rs. 675/- and after completion of his journey submitted bill and the receipt granted by the Taxi driver and the balance was duly deposited in his account. 5. 675/- and after completion of his journey submitted bill and the receipt granted by the Taxi driver and the balance was duly deposited in his account. 5. There is no dispute that the appellant was entitled to leave travel concession and there is no train-route from Sainthia to Digha and the appeal remained pending in this Hon'ble Court about 13 years relating to allegations made against the appellant 17 years back. 6. Heard the Ld. Advocates for the Appellant and the State perused the records. This court does not consider it necessary to go into the details of the evidence on record as the conviction relates to Section 420 IPC only. 7. It appears that the basis of conviction of the Appellant u/s. 420 IPC is the receipt (Ext. 3/4), submitted by the appellant for taxi fare from Sainthia to Digha and back was a forged document as there was no taxi registered as WGD 1722 and no company known as H.B. Trading Corporation registered with the Municipality for running business at Hatjanbar which has been proved by the prosecution on the evidence on record and accordingly the Bank was cheated with such forged document. 8. I have carefully gone through the evidence on record. This court does not find any convincing material to hold that the Ext. 3/4 is forged. Even if it is assumed that no such taxi with taxi No. WGD 1722 and no such company known as H.B. Trading Corporation mentioned in the receipt are in existence and are fake, if the taxi-driver gave such receipt to the Appellant, the Appellant cannot be convicted u/s. 420 IPC unless some more materials proving the ingredients of Section 420 IPC against the Appellant are proved beyond reasonable doubt. 9. I have no hesitation to hold that the evidence on record are too insufficient to hold the Appellant guilty u/s. 420 IPC. 10. The Appeal is therefore allowed and the conviction and sentence of the Appellant by Judgment and order dated 15.3.83 of the Ld. Judge Birbhum First Special Court, Suri in Special Court case No. 6 of 1983 are set aside and the Appellant is acquitted of the charge u/s. 420 IPC and discharged from his bail bonds.