MOTTY PHILIPOSE Vs. STATE OF KERALA
LAWS(KER)-2005-11-21
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
Decided on November 22,2005

MOTTY PHILIPOSE Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF KERALA Respondents


Referred Judgements :-

STATE OF KERALA V. PARMESWARAN NAIR RADHAKRISHNAN NAIR [REFERRED TO]
RATTAN LAL V. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
RAMJI MISSAR VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
SATYABHAN KISHORE VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
DAULAT RAM VS. STATE OF HARYANA [REFERRED TO]
MOHAMED AZIZ MOHAMED NASIR VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
KRISHNAN VS. KURUKSHETRA UNIVERSITY KURUKSHETRA [REFERRED TO]
MUSA KHAN VS. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA [REFERRED TO]
MASARULLAH VS. STATE OF TAMIL NADU [REFERRED TO]
RAM LAL VS. STATE OF PUNJAB [REFERRED TO]
ABDUL REHMAN ANTULAY VS. R S NAYAK [REFERRED TO]
COMMON CAUSE" A REGISTERED SOCIETY DIRECTOR VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
N S GIRI VS. CORPORATION OF CITY OF MANGALORE [REFERRED TO]
RAJ DEO SHARMA VS. STATE OF BIHAR [REFERRED TO]
M C MEHTA VS. UNION OF INDIA [REFERRED TO]
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH V. DHARAM PAL [REFERRED TO]
A S KRISHNAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
PRATAP SINGH VS. STATE OF JHAKHAND [REFERRED TO]
JOHNSON VS. KUNJU KUNJU [REFERRED TO]
RAVEENDRAN VS. FOOD INSPECTOR PINARAYI PANCHAYAT [REFERRED TO]
NANDAKUMAR VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
JOY VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]
L S AHOKAN VS. STATE OF KERALA [REFERRED TO]



Cited Judgements :-

ZAFAR IQBAL VS. STATE OF U P [LAWS(ALL)-2012-9-140] [REFERRED TO]


JUDGEMENT

- (1.)This appeal is by accused 1 and 2, a student and his father, in S. C. No. 128/91 on the file of the 5th Additional Special Sessions Court, Thiruvananthapuram. They stand convicted for offences punishable under Sections 120-B 420 465 466 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 3 years each under Sections 420 466 468 and 471 with a direction that the sentences shall run concurrently. No separate sentence was ordered under Sections 465 and 120-B IPC. They faced trial with two others for the offences mentioned above. The 3rd accused was acquitted. The 4th accused is no more and the charge against him abated.
(2.)The prosecution case was that they, along with CW. 1, an accused turned approver, hatched a conspiracy in order to forge a mark list of the Pre Degree Examination held in March, 1977 in which the first accused had appeared and to make use of it to secure admission for M. B. B. S. Course in the merit quota for the 1st accused. Ext. P25 is the allegedly forged mark list, on the strength of which, the first accused obtained admission. The allegation was that he, after getting Ext. P25, knowing it to be a forged document, made use of it to obtain admission in the Medical College and deceived the public authorities.
(3.)xxx xxx xxx


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.