Judgment KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. 1. Present appeal has been instituted by State of Punjab aggrieved against the judgment of acquittal. Respondent R. K. Puri was tried by the Court of Judicial Magistrate (1st Class), Jalandhar in case FIR No.120 dated 07.06.1994 registered at Police Station Sadar Jalandhar under Sec.419, 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. 2. The FIR was registered on the basis of a written application ex. PW-6/a submitted by Ashwani Kumar, President of Citizens Welfare Society. The application/complaint Ex. PW-6/a was submitted on behalf of 12 persons, who stated that they had failed in B. A. Part-I examination. Then they had taken admission in B. A. Part-I of Guru Ravidas International College (Co-education), lambra (Recognized ). The Principal of the said College accused respondent R. K. Puri is alleged to have represented that he is having many degrees (qualification) and his College was recognized by the University. Therefore, he will make all these candidates appear in Criminal Appeal No.709-SBA of 1997 2 b. A. Part-II examination instead of B. A. Part-I examination, as his College was affiliated to Guru Nanak Dev University. The accused respondent has charged Rs. six thousand/ ten thousand from the various candidates. He had also issued few receipts. Later, the candidates came to know that the admission forms were sent late, as they were not in consonance with the rules of the University and the college was also not affiliated. The College had displayed a false board stating that the College is affiliated. The admission forms of the candidates were also got attested from some unauthorized person and the University had raised an objection that the person who attested the forms was not a genuine person. Some students, who belonged to Scheduled Castes, appeared in the examination and the accused had illegally obtained money from the students. Students had narrated their difficulty to respectable persons of the locality, on whose intervention the accused agreed to issue cheques of certain amount to the candidates, but the cheques were dishonoured. The grievance of the complainants was that accused had opened a fake College at his residence and is cheating the people and obtaining money and in this manner playing with the future of the children. In the application, a prayer was made that legal action be taken against the accused. The written complaint Ex. The grievance of the complainants was that accused had opened a fake College at his residence and is cheating the people and obtaining money and in this manner playing with the future of the children. In the application, a prayer was made that legal action be taken against the accused. The written complaint Ex. PW-6/a was submitted by ashwani Kumar, President of Citizens Welfare Society and was signed by 12 persons namely (1) Chander Mohan (2) Ashwani Kumar (3) Charan Kanwal Singh (4) Manjeet Singh (5) Jaspal Singh (6) Sanjeev Kumar (7) Nirmal Kumar (8) Sukhwinder Pal (9) Naresh Kumar (10) Harjeev Kumar (11) Ajmer Singh (12) Rajni gupta. On this complaint, on 7th June, 1994 at 5.50 p. m. Harjinder Singh, SHO police Station Lambra made an endorsement and case was registered at Police station Sadar Jalandhar at 6.30 p. m. 3. The matter was investigated and report under Sec.173 Cr. P. C. was submitted. On 8th April, 1995, Additional Chief judicial Magistrate, Jalandhar framed charges against the accused respondent. The first charge framed against the accused respondent was that on 7th June, 1994 in the area of Lambra, he had cheated 12 persons, whose names have been mentioned above, by impersonating himself and thereby committed offence under section 419 IPC. Secondly, on the same day, i. e. on 7th June, 1994, he induced the above said persons to deliver the property to other persons thereby committed offence under Sec.420 IPC. Thirdly, on the same day, time and place, he had forged some documents, i. e. mark sheets of B. A. Part-I and thereby committed offence under Sec.467 IPC. Fourthly, he had forged these documents for the purpose of cheating, therefore offence under Sec.468 IPC is made out and lastly, since these documents were to be used as genuine one, therefore, offence under Sec.471 IPC was also made out. The accused respondent pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Prosecution examined seven witnesses. Narinder Singh Bhullar, Principal of Amardeep Singh Shergill memorial College, Mukandpur appeared as PW-1 and stated that prior to September 1993, he was posted as Acting Principal of Lyalpur Khalsa College, Jalandhar. He had seen application forms mark A/1 to A/7 and the signatures thereupon were not his. In cross examination, he admitted that application forms mark A/1 to a/7 were Photostat copies and he had not seen the original. He had seen application forms mark A/1 to A/7 and the signatures thereupon were not his. In cross examination, he admitted that application forms mark A/1 to a/7 were Photostat copies and he had not seen the original. He further stated that any student who had failed in B. A. Part-I was not eligible to appear in b. A. Part-II examination. This witness further stated that a candidate himself can also get the application form attested from any of the person authorized by the University, for purposes of verification. After the cross examination of this witness was concluded, Assistant Public Prosecutor made a request that he be allowed to re- Criminal Appeal No.709-SBA of 1997 4 examine this witness. The request was rejected by the trial Court on the ground that challan was presented on 3rd December, 1994, charge was framed on 8th April, 1995 and the original documents were never placed on record, therefore, request for re-examination of PW-1 after obtaining the originals was not entertained. The APP had made request for re- examination of PW-1 as the original documents were not available then. Sanjeev Kumar appeared as PW-2. He stated that he was studying in Guru Ravidas International College and accused was the Principal. He had appeared in B. A. Part-I examination. He failed to pass the examination. The accused represented to him that he would arrange his appearance in B. A. Part-II examination by getting him enrolled as a regular student. He further stated that accused continued to teach them throughout the year and took Rs.5000/-. But roll number was not given. The accused committed fraud and wasted one year of the witness and the College run by the accused was not recognized. In cross examination, this witness stated that he knew that the accused had done his m. Sc. It was not known to him that accused was working as Lecturer in DAV college. This witness had earlier failed in B. A. Part-I examination. He was confronted with his earlier statement Ex. DB, where it was not stated that accused had assured that he will get B. A. of the candidates completed after enrolling them as students. On material aspects, he was confronted with his previous statement Ex. DB. This witness admitted that accused used to take test every week. He was confronted with his earlier statement Ex. DB, where it was not stated that accused had assured that he will get B. A. of the candidates completed after enrolling them as students. On material aspects, he was confronted with his previous statement Ex. DB. This witness admitted that accused used to take test every week. The witness further stated that he had no receipt of payment of rs.5000/- made to the accused. PW-3 Ajmer Singh, PW-4 Ashwani Kumar and PW-5 jaspal Singh stated on the same lines. ASI Dilbag Singh appeared as PW-6. He proved various aspects of the investigation. 4. Mohinderbir Singh, Controller of Exams, Guru Nanak Dev University, amritsar appeared as PW-7. He stated that Guru Ravidas Criminal Appeal no.709-SBA of 1997 5 International College situated at Lambra, District jalandhar was not affiliated to the University and the College is not associated to the University in any manner. 5. Thereafter, statement of the accused under Sec.313 Cr. P. C. was recorded. He denied all the material allegations. He gave his version that he was imparting tuition at Guru Ravidas International College, Lambra. He had not committed any offence. 6. No defence evidence was led. 7. The trial Court regarding offence under Sec.419 IPC observed as under: "12. There is no allegation made by any witness that the accused had issued the said certificate in the name of some other persons or that he had signed the said certificate without being the principal of the college. It is no- where mentioned in the certificate that the college is affiliated with Guru nanak Dev University. No document has been placed on file and no evidence has been led that accused could not run the private college for imparting studies to students. The students who have been examined as PW2, PW3, PW4, or PW5 were not illiterate persons so as to be induced by the accused in any manner. It is submitted by PWs that accused had been teaching them for a year and then issued a certificate to them of his college. It is also submitted by the PWs that they had failed in B. A. Ist year examination before joining the college of the accused. It is submitted by PWs that accused had been teaching them for a year and then issued a certificate to them of his college. It is also submitted by the PWs that they had failed in B. A. Ist year examination before joining the college of the accused. It is not the case of the prosecution that the accused had issued them any certificate of Guru Nanak Dev University or of any another university and had signed the same being an official or competent authority of the said university. Mere issuance of a certificate pertaining to the college which was run by the accused cannot be said to constituted any offence." Furthermore, the trial Court came to the conclusion that the witnesses had improved their version and they were duly confronted, and gave following finding: "13. The witness was confronted with his statement recorded u/s 161 Cr. P. C. Going through the said statement u/s 161 cr. P. C. there is no allegation that accused had asked him to get his graduation completed and would also make him sit in the B. A. part IInd examination. The witness had admitted in his testimony as PW 2 that he could not get through B. A. Ist year examination of Guru Nanak Dev University. He had further stated in his statement u/s 161 Cr. P. C. that he had filled forms for B. A. Ist year examination but an objection was raised by the University at Amritsar that the form was not correctly filled and attested. Thus the witness admitted in his statement u/s 161 Cr. P. C. that he had only filled form for B. A. Ist year examination and that of Guru Nanak Dev University. He had no where stated that the accused had deceived him or that he had dis-honestly or fraudulently induced him to part with any property. The witness was educated to know that the college of accused was not affiliated with any university and that he could not make them to appear in B. A. IInd year examination especially when he had not cleared the B. A. Ist year examination. There is no such provision that any person who has failed in b. A. Ist year examination can sit for B. A. IInd year examination. Moreover, it was no where alleged in the statement u/s 161 Cr. There is no such provision that any person who has failed in b. A. Ist year examination can sit for B. A. IInd year examination. Moreover, it was no where alleged in the statement u/s 161 Cr. P. C. that the accused had claimed that his college was affiliated with Guru Nanak Dev University. As regards qualification of the accused, it was admitted by PW2 Sanjeev Kumar in his cross examination, that he was aware that the accused was an M. Sc. He further sated that the police had recorded his statement as per his dictation." The trial Court further observed as under: "14. As regards the statement of PW3 Ajmer Singh u/s 161 Cr. P. C. it was stated by him that the accused had filled his form for appearing in B. A. Ist year examination of Guru Nanak University and took Rs.5000/- from him and then issued a certificate bearing Roll No.77101 which turned out be a bogus one. No such allegation was made by the witness while appearing as PW3 and he improved upon his version Criminal Appeal No.709-SBA of 1997 7 recorded u/s 161 cr. P. C. and went on to state an entirely different story than what he had recorded u/s 161 Cr. P. C. The witness was confronted with the said statement. Only allegation made in the statement u/s 161 Cr. P. C. was that accused had issued a bogus certificate of B. A. Ist part which has been placed on file as mark A-8. I have gone through the said certificate. The same cannot read into evidence as it was not proved as per provisions of law." 8. From a perusal of the evidence it has come on record that the accused respondent was running an Academy and was imparting education to the students from 9th Class to B. A. He used to take classes from morning to evening and also used to hold weekly test. Therefore, for one year he had imparted education to the students. The trial Court had minutely discussed each part of the evidence and formulated a view which is possible. The view formulated by the trial Court is neither perverse nor perfunctory. In appeal against acquittal, if one view is possible, the appellate Court will not substitute its opinion simply on the ground that some other view can also be formulated. 9. The trial Court had minutely discussed each part of the evidence and formulated a view which is possible. The view formulated by the trial Court is neither perverse nor perfunctory. In appeal against acquittal, if one view is possible, the appellate Court will not substitute its opinion simply on the ground that some other view can also be formulated. 9. Thus, no interference is warranted and present appeal is dismissed being devoid of any merit.