Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2024 DIGILAW 60 (HP)

Hari Dass v. State of H. P.

2024-01-10

VIRENDER SINGH

body2024
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. Petitioners have filed the present revision petition, against the judgment of conviction, dated 01.09.2015 and order of sentence dated 04.09.2015, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-II, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘First Appellate Court’), in Criminal Appeal No. RBT 218-S/10 of 14/11, titled as ‘State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Hari Dass and another’. 2. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence, as referred-to-above passed by the learned Appellate Court, the learned Appellate Court has allowed the appeal filed by the State, which has been preferred against the judgment of acquittal dated 14.01.2011, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.4, Shimla, District Shimla, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘learned trial Court’) in Police Challan RBT No. 49/2 of 06/04 titled as ‘State of Himachal Pradesh vs. Hari Dass and another’. 3. Vide judgment of conviction and order of sentence as referred-to-above, the learned Appellate Court has set aside the judgment of acquittal and convicted and sentenced petitioner Hari Dass for the offences punishable under Sections 170, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the ‘IPC’), whereas, petitioner Prakash Chand was convicted and sentenced for the offences punishable under Sections 467 and 468 IPC as under:- 1. That convict Hari Dass is hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and Rs.5000/- to for pay fine of the offence punishable under Section 170 IPC and in default of payment of fine he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 2. That both the convicts are hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay fine of Rs.10,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 467 IPC and in default of payment of fine they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. 3. That both the convicts are hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.5,000/- each for the offence punishable under Section 468 IPC and in default of payment of fine they shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 4. That convict Hari Dass is hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 471 IPC and in default of payment of fine he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 4. 4. That convict Hari Dass is hereby sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay fine of Rs.5000/- for the offence punishable under Section 471 IPC and in default of payment of fine he shall further undergo simple imprisonment for one month. 4. The learned Appellate Court, however, has ordered that all the sentences shall run concurrently. 5. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present lis, are hereinafter referred to, in the same manner, as were, referred to, by the learned trial Court. 6. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present revision petition, before this Court, may be summed up, as under:- 6. 1. Police of PS Sadar Shimla has submitted a report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C in case FIR No. 328 of 2003, dated 15.10.2003, registered under Sections 170, 420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The said report was submitted against both the accused persons on the ground that on 15.10.2003, ASI Dharam Singh along-with other police officials was on patrolling duty and was present at Ridge near Padam Dev Complex, then, one Ajay Kumar son of Damodar Dass was selling boiled eggs. He has apprised ASI Dharam Singh that the person standing by his side is harassing him and proclaiming himself to be the CIA Incharge. The said person has also shown his identity card to Ajay Kumar. According to Ajay Kumar, he has suspicion that he is a false CIA Incharge, upon which, ASI Dharam Singh, inquired about the name and address of that person, who has disclosed his name as Hari Dass son of Hari Ram, resident of village Patta, P.O. Saryaanj Tehsil Arki, District Solan, H.P and stated to be working as Care Taker in A.G. Office, Shimla. Hari Dass was having an identity card bearing No. 336, of Himachal Pradesh Police, in which, his rank has been mentioned as Constable CID. Said I.D. card is stated to be signed by the Dy. SP, CID on 13.06.1995. 6.2. It is the further case of the prosecution that Hari Dass has falsely represented himself to be the CIA Incharge, as such, he is trying to dupe Ajay Kumar, upon which, ASI submitted the rukka for registration of FIR, upon which, FIR in question has been registered. The identity card was taken into possession and the spot map was prepared. The accused was arrested. 6.3. The identity card was taken into possession and the spot map was prepared. The accused was arrested. 6.3. During investigation, the said person has disclosed that the identity card was got prepared by Prakash Chand, who is working in the DGP office. When, the said card was sent to FSL, Junga, it was found that the identity card bears the signatures of Prakash Chand and signed by Hari Dass. It has been found in the investigation that Prakash Chand, who is working as Junior Assistant in DGP office, in connivance with accused Hari Dass, who is working in the A.G. office, has prepared the identity card by depicting Hari Dass as Constable in CID. Hari Dass used the said identity card number of times. 6.4. On 15.10.2003 also, he was representing himself to be the CIA Incharge to Ajay Kumar and harassed him. After completion of the investigation, the police has submitted the report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C against accused Hari Dass under Sections 170, 467, 468 and 470 IPC, whereas, against accused Prakash Chand under Sections 467 and 468 IPC. 7. On the basis of report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C, the learned trial Court has framed the charges under Sections 170, 467, 468 and 470 IPC against accused Hari Dass and charges under Sections 467 and 468 IPC against accused Prakash Chand. 8. When, the charges, so framed, were put to the accused persons, they have denied the charges framed against them and claimed to the tried. Consequently, the prosecution has been directed to adduce evidence. As such, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. 9. After closure of the evidence of the prosecution, the entire incriminating evidence appearing against the accused persons was put to them in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Both of them have taken the plea of innocence and the defence that they have falsely been implicated. However, they have not led any evidence in support of their defence. 10. Thereafter, the learned trial Court after hearing the learned APP, as well as, the learned counsel for the accused persons has acquitted the accused persons from the offences, for which, they have been charge sheeted. 11. However, they have not led any evidence in support of their defence. 10. Thereafter, the learned trial Court after hearing the learned APP, as well as, the learned counsel for the accused persons has acquitted the accused persons from the offences, for which, they have been charge sheeted. 11. The State, being aggrieved from the said judgment of acquittal has preferred Criminal Appeal No. RBT 218-S/10 of 14/11, before the learned Appellate Court, mainly on the ground that the learned trial Court has wrongly ignored the cogent, reliable and trustworthy evidence led by the prosecution. The judgment of acquittal has simply been passed on the ground that the independent witnesses have turned hostile and not supported the case of prosecution. 11.1. Elaborating its stand, it has been submitted that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the fact that in such like cases of fake identity, the independent witnesses do not take side of the prosecution and for many reasons, they resile from their previous statements. 11.2. The findings have further been assailed on the ground that though the independent witnesses have not supported the case of the prosecution, but, have admitted signatures on the seizure memos through which fake identity card was taken into possession. The learned trial Court has wrongly discarded the statement of PW-6 Dr. Meenakshi, who has categorically stated that the specimen S-1 to S-20, A-1 and A- 2, Q -1 of disputed identity card have been written by the same person. Not only this, she has further deposed that specimen hand writing S-21 to S-30, A-3 to A-8 and Q-2 on the disputed identity card are written by one and the same person. 11.3. On the basis of above grounds, a prayer has been made to allow the appeal, by setting aside the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court, with a prayer that the accused persons may kindly be convicted and sentenced for the offences, for which, they have been charge sheeted, in this case. 12. The said appeal was allowed by the learned Appellate Court and the accused persons were convicted and sentenced, as referred-to-above. 13. Aggrieved from the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Appellate Court, accused persons have preferred the present revision petition before this Court. 14. 12. The said appeal was allowed by the learned Appellate Court and the accused persons were convicted and sentenced, as referred-to-above. 13. Aggrieved from the said judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Appellate Court, accused persons have preferred the present revision petition before this Court. 14. The judgment of conviction and order of sentence has been assailed on the ground that the accused persons have wrongly been convicted and sentenced, as, the I.O has not complied with the provisions of Section 154 Cr.P.C, in this case, as, it has been alleged by the prosecution that one Ajay Kumar had disclosed commission of cognizable offence to the I.O. (PW-11), but, the I.O. has not recorded the statement of witnesses under Section 154 Cr.P.C and these omissions have been made by the IO, according to the accused persons, in order to settle the scores with accused Prakash Chand. 15. The findings have further been assailed on the ground that the learned Appellate Court has assumed the fact that the identity card Ext. PW-6/B was in original produced by accused Hari Dass, whereas, the said findings are stated to be contrary to the record. 16. The findings have further been assailed on the ground that the learned Appellate Court has wrongly held that Ext. PW-1/A contains the handwriting of accused Hari Dass, whereas, no such legal evidence is on the file to give an occasion to draw such inference. 17. In the alternative, it has also been pleaded that even for the sake of argument, the recovery of the document from the house of accused Hari Dass could not be taken to mean that it was written by him only and none-else. There is no legal, cogent and trustworthy evidence to suggest that Ext. PW-1/A was recovered from the house of Hari Dass. 18. The findings have further been assailed on the ground that the learned Appellate Court has wrongly held the writing on documents Ext. PW-2/A and Ext. PW-2/B to be the admitted handwriting of Prakash Chand, whereas, these documents alleged to be the leave applications submitted by accused Prakash Chand. This fact, according to the petitioners, could not raise any legal presumption that these were, in fact, in the handwriting of accused Prakash Chand. PW-2/A and Ext. PW-2/B to be the admitted handwriting of Prakash Chand, whereas, these documents alleged to be the leave applications submitted by accused Prakash Chand. This fact, according to the petitioners, could not raise any legal presumption that these were, in fact, in the handwriting of accused Prakash Chand. The learned Appellate Court has assessed the evidence of the prosecution on the touchstone of preponderance of probabilities, whereas, according to the petitioners, the prosecution is bound to prove the case against them beyond any shadow of doubt. There is no evidence on record to show that documents Ext. PW-2/A and Ext. PW-2/B were kept in due course of official procedure and the inadmissible evidence has been taken into consideration. The evidence of PW-6 Dr. Meenakshi Mahajan has been given undue weightage, whereas, according to the petitioners, the said evidence of expert is always considered as a very weak type of evidence. 19. On the basis of above facts, Mr. Ajay Kochhar, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Vivek Sharma, Advocate has argued that the revision petition may kindly be allowed, by setting aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned Appellate Court, by restoring the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned trial Court. 20. In order to decide the controversy involved in the present petition, it would be just and appropriate for this Court, to discuss the evidence, so adduced by the prosecution before the learned trial Court. 21. As stated above, after framing of charge, when the accused persons have not pleaded guilty, the prosecution has examined as many as 12 witnesses. 22. PW-1 Sukh Dev Singh deposed that on 18.10.2003, in presence of this witness and Hari Dass, the residential quarter of Hari Dass at Longwood was searched. During search, one diary having the words ‘refined vegetable oil’ written on it, was taken into possession, in which, the account of domestic articles was mentioned. The same was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW - 1/A. He has proved the diary Ext. P-1. This witness has feigned his ignorance about the fact as to from where, Ext. P-1 was recovered. Before searching the quarter, no one had given his personal search to him. He has shown his ignorance whether Ext. P-1 was in fact found from the quarter or it was brought by someone at that time. The handwriting over Ext. P-1. This witness has feigned his ignorance about the fact as to from where, Ext. P-1 was recovered. Before searching the quarter, no one had given his personal search to him. He has shown his ignorance whether Ext. P-1 was in fact found from the quarter or it was brought by someone at that time. The handwriting over Ext. P-1 was not written in his presence. He has also feigned his ignorance whether the signatures A-3 to A-8 on Ext. P-1 were signed by Hari Dass or not. This witness had not worked with Hari Dass, as such, he could not identify the signature and handwriting on Ext.P-1. 23. PW-2 Harbans Lal was posted as MHC in Police Station Sadar. He was associated in the investigation by the police. On 03.01.2004, Diwan Chand, Superintendent, PHQ (Estate) has submitted the application for leave moved by Prakash Chand, Junior Assistant. The said document was in English. The document was produced and was taken into possession vide memo Ext. PW-2/A. The said document is stated to be Ext.P-2 and memo Ext.PW-2/A was signed by this witness and Diwan Chand. 24. In cross-examination, this witness has deposed that he never worked with Prakash Chand nor he could identify the signatures of Prakash Chand. The application was produced by the Superintendent PHQ. 25. PW-3 Dina Nath, when appeared in the witness box, has turned hostile, however, in the cross-examination by learned APP, he has deposed that on 15th October, he was present at the Ridge and Ajay Kumar was selling the boiled eggs. Except this, he has denied all the suggestions which were put to him by the learned APP to prove the case of the prosecution. When, he was asked to identify the accused, he feigned his ignorance about the fact as to whether the said person was present on the spot or not. He has admitted his signatures over memo Ext.PW-3/A, but, denied that the said document was readover to him and thereafter he has put his signatures. According to him, he has signed memos Ext.PW-3/A and Ext.PW-3/B. He has put signatures on memo Ext.PW-3/A, at the instance of the police. 26. In cross-examination by the learned counsel for the accused persons, he has reiterated that he had not seen the accused, prior to the date, when, he appeared in the Court. According to him, he has signed memos Ext.PW-3/A and Ext.PW-3/B. He has put signatures on memo Ext.PW-3/A, at the instance of the police. 26. In cross-examination by the learned counsel for the accused persons, he has reiterated that he had not seen the accused, prior to the date, when, he appeared in the Court. However, he has deposed that none of the accused had shown his identify card to him. 27. PW-4 Diwan Chand deposed that at the request of the police, on 14.11.2003, he has submitted the application written by Prakash Chand, which was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW-2/A. The said application, according to cross-examination of this witness, was not written in presence of this witness and the same was already on record. He has also feigned his ignorance about the fact as to whether the said application, which was handed over to the police, was written by Prakash Chand in his own hand writing or not. 28. PW-5 Prem Chand, Senior Assistant has witnessed the memo Ext.PW-4/B, by virtue of which, the police has taken into possession, the application. 29. PW-6 Meenakshi Mahanan, has submitted her report. 30. PW-7 Gian Chand Negi was posted as Executive Magistrate (Urban), Shimla. On 13.11.2003, ASI Dharam Singh has sought his permission to taken specimen signatures of Prakash Chand. Consequently, the specimen signatures of Prakash Chand were obtained in his presence by ASI Dharam Singh. The request for obtaining the specimen writing and signatures is Ext.PW-7/A. According to him, Ext.PW-6/C-1 to Ext.PW-6/C-10 and Ext.PW-6/C-11 to Ext.PW-6/C-20, were got written by the accused. This witness has admitted that he was not having any case or inquiry pending against the said persons, before him nor the said persons were personally known to him. Those persons were not got identified from anyone. 31. PW-8 Manjeet Sharma was posted as Naib Tehsildar. According to him, on 17.11.2003, on the request of police vide memo Ext.PW-7/A, the specimen signatures of Hari Dass were obtained, which are Ext.PW-6/21 to Ext.PW-6/30 and thereafter, those sheets were handed over to the police. Like PW-7, he has also deposed that he was not having any case or inquiry pending against the said persons, before him nor the said persons were personally known to him. 32. PW-9 Jagat Ram was posted as Senior Assistant in the Police Headquarter at the relevant time. Like PW-7, he has also deposed that he was not having any case or inquiry pending against the said persons, before him nor the said persons were personally known to him. 32. PW-9 Jagat Ram was posted as Senior Assistant in the Police Headquarter at the relevant time. On 14.11.2003, Diwan Chand Sharma, on the request of the police has produced the application, stated to be written by Prakash Chand, which was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW-4/B. He has identified the said application as Ext.PW-4/A. 33. In cross-examination this witness has deposed that he has never worked with Prakash Chand nor he could identify his signatures. He has deposed about the fact the application was stated to be written by Prakash Chand because, Prakash Chand was written on it. 34. PW-10 ASI Dharam Singh is the I.O of the case. According to him, on 15.10.2003, he, along-with Constable Sushil Kumar, was on patrolling duty and was present near Padam Dev Complex at Ridge, Shimla. Ajay Kumar came to him and disclosed that he is selling boiled eggs and one person is harassing him. The said person is pretending to be the CIA Incharge and he has shown his identity card to him. According to Ajay Kumar, he is having suspicion that the said person is falsely pretending himself to be CIA Incharge, as CIA Incharge is known to him, upon which, he has inquired from the said person and the said person has disclosed his name as Hari Dass and stated to be working in the Accountant General office as Care Taker. He has shown his identity card bearing No.336 issued by the Himachal Pradesh Police, in which his rank has been mentioned as Constable CID. The said card was issued on 13.06.1995. The said card was bearing signatures of Dy. S.P. CID. He has further deposed that accused Hari Dass impersonated to be the CID Incharge, as such, he was harassing Ajay Kumar, upon which, rukka Ext. PW-1/A was prepared by him and sent through Constable Sushil Kumar, upon which, FIR under Sections 170,420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC was registered. The said card was bearing signatures of Dy. S.P. CID. He has further deposed that accused Hari Dass impersonated to be the CID Incharge, as such, he was harassing Ajay Kumar, upon which, rukka Ext. PW-1/A was prepared by him and sent through Constable Sushil Kumar, upon which, FIR under Sections 170,420, 467, 468 and 471 IPC was registered. When, personal search of Hari Dass was conducted, then, from his possession, photograph of Prakash Chand was found, which was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW-3/B. The said photograph is stated to Ext.P-X. The identity card was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW-3/A. The identity card is Ext.PW-6/B. The spot map was prepared, which is Ext.PW-10/B. Thereafter, accused Hari Dass was arrested and produced before the Court, from where, he was remanded to the police custody. 35. On 13.11.2003, he was associated in the investigation. The accused was produced before the Executive Magistrate. The identity card and the admitted signatures were sent for comparison to FSL, Junga, by moving application Ext.D-1. After receiving the report Ext.PW-6/A, accused Prakash Chand was formally arrested. Thereafter, the challan was prepared and submitted in the Court. 36. In cross-examination, this witness has deposed that complainant Ajay Kumar was not having any link with any police official nor all the police officials were known to him. Similarly, no-one can identify all the policemen from the photo on their identity card. The complainant has disclosed to this witness that accused Hari Dass had shown identity card to him. This person was standing just by the side of the complainant. Not only this witness, but, Constable was also standing there. However, in his presence, accused No.1 had not talked with Ajay Kumar nor shown his identity card. Accused had not made efforts to flee away. This witness has admitted that when he had talked to accused, he has disclosed his correct name, address and profession. Incident had allegedly taken place at about 9.00 p.m. No independent witnesses were associated. However, search was conducted in the presence of independent witness Sonu, who was a mule operator. He has denied that there was no photograph over identity card Ext.PW-6/B. 37. In further cross-examination, he has deposed that there was no photograph over Ext.PW-6/B rather, there is impression of photograph inside the lamination paper. He could not disclose the name of Dy.S.P. CID. He has denied that there was no photograph over identity card Ext.PW-6/B. 37. In further cross-examination, he has deposed that there was no photograph over Ext.PW-6/B rather, there is impression of photograph inside the lamination paper. He could not disclose the name of Dy.S.P. CID. Accused Prakash Chand was not with accused Hari Dass, at the relevant time. Prakash Chand was working in the police headquarter. He has denied that photograph Ext.P-X was not found from the pocket of accused Hari Dass. He has admitted that in the document Ext.PW-3/A, the place meant for name of the witness, is blank. Rest, he has denied all the suggestions which were put to him. 38. PW-11 HC Dev Raj was posted in PP, Lakkar Bazar at the relevant time. On 18.10.2003, he was associated in the investigation. In his presence, the police has recovered the diary Ext.P-1 from the residential quarter of Hari Dass at Longwood. The said document was taken into possession vide memo Ext.PW-1/A. 39. PW-12 HC Kanwar deposed that he was associated in the investigation of the case. The I.O. has moved application for obtaining specimen signatures of Hari Dass vide memo Ext.PW-7/A. The specimen hand writing of accused Hari Dass is Ext.S-21 to Ext.S-30. After obtaining hand writing specimens, those documents were handed over to the I.O. 40. This is the entire evidence on record, which has been led by the prosecution. 41. Learned trial Court, in the present case, has acquitted the accused persons mainly, on the ground that the evidence of the alleged complainant Ajay Kumar has not been recorded in the Court and unfortunately, before appearing in the Court, he had expired. Not only this, PW-3, another star witness, when, appeared in the witness box, has turned hostile. As per prosecution case, the criminal machinery was put into motion by Ajay Kumar, son of Damodar Dass, by disclosing the facts to ASI Dharam Singh on 15.10.2003, alleging therein, that one person is harassing him on the pretext that he is a CIA Incharge and the said person had also shown his identity card to Ashok Kumar. As stated above, statement of said Ashok Kumar has not been recorded by ASI Dharam Singh under Section 154 Cr.P.C. The rukka is on the file as Ext.PW-10/A. This rukka has been submitted to the police by ASI Dharam Singh. As stated above, statement of said Ashok Kumar has not been recorded by ASI Dharam Singh under Section 154 Cr.P.C. The rukka is on the file as Ext.PW-10/A. This rukka has been submitted to the police by ASI Dharam Singh. Whatsoever mentioned in this rukka has allegedly been disclosed to ASI Dharam Singh by Ajay Kumar. Whatsoever allegedly happened with Ajay Kumar has neither been seen by ASI Dharam Singh nor the alleged conversation between accused Hari Dass was heard by ASI Dharam Singh. 42. Interestingly, the I.O, at the relevant time, who was holding the rank of Assistant Sub Inspector, has not bothered to record the statement of person, who has brought the factum of commission of alleged offence to him under Section 154 Cr.P.C. Non-recording of statement of complainant Ajay Kumar, in the present case, assumes significance, as this witness has disclosed about the commission of alleged offence to ASI Dharam Singh. He has disclosed that he is having suspicion that the said person is falsely pretending to be the CIA Incharge as the CIA Incharge is known to complainant Ajay Kumar. When ASI Dharam Singh appeared in the witness box, he has again reiterated the fact that Ajay Kumar disclosed to him that one person is harassing him and pretending himself to be the CIA Incharge and also shown his identity card to him. Thereafter, the said person has expressed his suspicion that this person is impersonating as CIA Incharge, as, CIA Incharge is known to him, upon which, ASI Dharam Singh had inquired from the said person, who has disclosed his name as Hari Dass. 43. The important link, in this case, is statement of Ajay Kumar. As stated above, the I.O. has not bothered to record his statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C and unfortunately, the said person before he could be examined in the Court, had left this world. If the statement of PW-10 ASI Dharam Singh is seen, as per provisions of Section 60 of the Evidence Act, neither he has seen the alleged incident being taken place nor he had heard the conversation between Ajay Kumar and Hari Dass. As such, whatsoever deposed by this witness regarding the facts which were allegedly disclosed to him by Ajay Kumar, cannot be taken into consideration. The statement, as made by the I.O, in the Court is ‘hearsay’ and the same cannot be taken into consideration. As such, whatsoever deposed by this witness regarding the facts which were allegedly disclosed to him by Ajay Kumar, cannot be taken into consideration. The statement, as made by the I.O, in the Court is ‘hearsay’ and the same cannot be taken into consideration. 44. Learned Appellate Court, in the present case, has reversed the judgment of acquittal by holding that the findings of the learned trial Court are suffering from irregularities and illegalities. It is no longer res-integra that the learned Appellate Court has power to reverse the findings of the learned trial Court, acquitting the accused, if the findings are found to be suffering from perversity. If two views are possible, then, the view, which has been adopted by the Court acquitting the accused, should be adopted, as, with the judgment of acquittal passed in favour of a person, the presumption of innocence which was initially available to him becomes double. 45. The learned Appellate Court has accepted the version of the prosecution that the accused pretending himself to be the Constable in CIA staff. He was carrying the identity card, which was found in his possession. 46. Learned Additional Advocate General appearing for the State could not point out how the allegations, as contained in the report, under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C does not amount to evidence against the accused, whereas, the star witness i.e. I.O. has stated that this fact has been disclosed to him by Ajay Kumar, whose statement under Section 154 Cr.P.C was not recorded, and unfortunately, before appearing as witness before the learned trial Court, he has left for heavenly abode. In such situation, whatsoever deposed by PW -10 regarding the alleged disclosure by Ajay Kumar is, too short, to connect the accused with the crime, what to talk to prove the case against the accused persons beyond any shadow of doubt. Moreover, conviction cannot be passed on the basis of ‘prima-facie case’. The concept of prima-facie as has been adopted by the learned Appellate Court, can be used for framing the charge, but, not convicting a person. 47. The relevant para 32 of the judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court is reproduced as under:- “32. Verily, in the present case, the accused pretended himself to be a Constable in CID staff. He was carrying an identity card which was found in his possession. In fact, he as not so. 47. The relevant para 32 of the judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court is reproduced as under:- “32. Verily, in the present case, the accused pretended himself to be a Constable in CID staff. He was carrying an identity card which was found in his possession. In fact, he as not so. The accused had been working as case taker in A.G. Office Shimla. The accused 15 pretended to be a CIA Constable while he is deemed to be aware that in fact he was not a CIA staff. Prima-facie case with respect to the commission of offence under Section 170 IPC would be attracted. Both the accused persons namely Hari Dass and Prakash Chand had also been booked punishable for commission of under Section 467, 468 offence of IPC whereas the accused Hari Dass also for offence under Section 471 of IPC. All these offences are relating to forgery.” 48. In view of the discussion made above, the judgment passed by the learned Appellate Court, convicting and sentencing the accused persons is not sustainable and the same is set aside and the judgment passed by the learned trial Court is upheld. 49. The bail bond and surety bond furnished by the accused persons are discharged. They are directed to furnish the bail bond in the sum of Rs.30,000/- each with one surety each of the like amount under the provisions of Section 437-A Cr.P.C to the satisfaction of learned Registrar General of this Court within a period of seven days, by giving an undertaking to appear before the Hon’ble Apex Court, in case, this judgment is being assailed before the Apex Court. 50. Record be sent back.