IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 Date of decision: 17th March, 2010 Gurminder Singh … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Ms. Anjali Khosla, Advocate for Mr. Vikas Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Manish Deswal, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. Present revision petition has been preferred by Gurminder Singh son of Waryam Singh. The petitioner was named as an accused in case FIR No.130 dated 19.05.1995 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Bhiwani under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 IPC. In the above said FIR, the petitioner was tried by the Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani, which held him guilty of an offence punishable under Section 471 IPC. Co-accused of the petitioner, Dr.Bhag Singh Premi alias Vichitra Singh was held guilty of an offence punishable under Section 465, 468, 471 IPC. After holding the petitioner guilty, he was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.1000/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. Co-accused of the Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 petitioner, Dr.Bhag Singh Premi alias Vichitra Singh, was also sentenced for various offences. Aggrieved against the same, petitioner had filed an appeal. The appellate Court below, upholding the conviction and maintaining the sentence of the petitioner, had dismissed the appeal. From a perusal of the judgment passed by the trial Court, it is evident that the petitioner had undergone sentence from 3rd January, 1997 to 18th December, 1998. It is stated that Bhag Singh Premi had not preferred any appeal. On 19th May, 1995, Dr.Mahavir Singh, IAS, the then Secretary, Board of School Education Haryana, Bhiwani, had sent a D.O. letter to Laik Ram Dabas, IPS, Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani. The letter Ex.PA, on the basis of which formal FIR Ex.PA/2 was registered, when translated into English, reads as under: “Dear Shri Dabas, Today on 19.5.95, Gurminder Singh son of Waryam Singh resident of Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara, Solan, Himachal Pradesh, met the undersigned along with one letter bearing No.7621-H.S.E.B. dated 5.5.1995 issued under the signatures of the Chairman, Board of School Education, Bhiwani. As per the letter, this person has been appointed as LDC. Statement of Gurminder Singh along with the letter is attached, in which he stated that for obtaining this job he has given Rs.10000/- to Sh.Bhag Singh Premi, General Secretary, Manav Seva Trust, Railway Road, Digboi (Assam). This person (Bhag Singh Premi) gave discourse in various Gurdwaras and remained in the Gurdwara of accused from 27th April to 9th May. 2 Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 The letter of appointment given by the applicant to Dr.Bhag Singh Premi along with the application dated 2nd May, 1995 contained forged signatures of the Chairman. One photograph and letter written by Bhag Singh Premi is attached. In this office, there is no post of LDC. Signatures of the Chairman are forged. The Board of School Education Haryana issued no appointment letter. We request you to register a case against Gurminder Singh son of Waryam Singh resident of Sri Guru Singh Sabha Gurdwara, Solan, Himachal Pradesh and Bhag Singh Premi, General Secretary, Manav Seva Trust, Railway Road, Digboi (Assam) under the various provisions of cheating, forgery and an FIR be lodged. Gurminder Singh is handed over to the police.” On receipt of this letter, the aforesaid FIR was registered. The matter was investigated and a report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. was submitted against the accused. It will be interesting to reproduce the chargesheet drawn by the trial Court as under: “I, Manjit Singh, HCS, Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani, do hereby charge you, Bhag Singh, as under:- That you on 5.5.95, at Bhiwani, forged an appointment letter dated 5.5.95, offering an appointment as L.D.C. to Gurminder Singh son of Baryam Singh, your co-accused (now discharged) and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 465 IPC and within the cognizance of this Court. Secondly, that you on the same date and place, you forged the appointment letter dated 5.5.95 above mentioned, which was a valuable security being a letter entitling said Gurminder Singh to seek the appointment as LDC and 3 Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 467 IPC and within the cognizance of this Court. Thirdly, that you on the same date and place, used the above mentioned appointment letter, which was forged one, for cheating Gurminder Singh and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 468 IPC and within the cognizance of this Court. Fourthly, that on the same date and place, dishonestly used as genuine said appointment letter dated 5.5.95 as genuine knowing fully well and it was forged one and thereby committed an offence punishable u/s 471 IPC and within the cognizance of this Court. And, I hereby direct that you be tried by this Court on the aforesaid charge-sheet.” The charge framed under Section 465, 467 and 468 stated that the petitioner was cheated by Bhag Singh Premi, who had offered an appointment letter to him. The charge further stated that the appointment letter was dishonestly used as a genuine one, fully knowing well that the same was a forged letter. The chargesheet also stated that Gurminder Singh had been discharged. The Court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani, while framing charges, on 5th October, 1996 passed a detailed order and discharged the accused. The order reads as under: “7. … … … So there is no evidence that the accused used this letter as genuine and requested the Education Board to give the appointment. So no offence punishable under Section 471 IPC is also made against the accused Gurminder Singh. The only allegations against the accused Gurminder Singh are that he kept in his possession a forged letter. Mere possession of forged letter is no offence. As such prima-facie no offence punishable under 4 Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 Section 420/465/467/468/471 IPC is made out against the accused Gurminder Singh. As such the accused Gurminder Singh is hereby discharged.” Against the discharge of the accused, a revision petition was filed, in which the order of discharge of the accused petitioner was set aside and he was put to trial. Prosecution examined Gaje Singh Security Officer, Education Board Bhiwani as PW-1, who stated that on 19th May, 1995 Gurminder Singh accused petitioner came to the office of the Board and produced an appointment letter Ex.PW3/A and it was found that the appointment letter was forged. Maman Singh PW-2 was the Security Guard, Haryana School Education Board, Bhiwani. He stated that on 11th May, 1995, one boy Gurminder Singh came to him and told that he had got appointment in the Board and he had to join his duty. He was carrying an appointment letter. Pritam Lal Thareja, Private Secretary to Chairman, Education Board, Bhiwani appeared as PW-3 and stated that he had seen the appointment letter Ex.PW3/A, which contained forged signatures of the Chairman and he was acquainted with the signatures of the Chairman in the discharge of official duties. Dr. Mahavir Singh complainant appeared as PW-7 to prove the complaint. The prosecution examined SI Med Singh Investigating Officer as PW-4, ASI Ramphal as PW-5 and HC Roshan Lal as PW-6. The trial Court noticed the following contention of the Assistant Public Prosecutor: 5 Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 “10. While initiating the arguments on behalf of the prosecution, the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor, for the State Sh.Shamsher Singh, argued that from the statements of PW-1 to PW-7 and documents relied upon by the prosecution Ex.PA, Ex.PB, Ex.PW3/A etc. the prosecution has been able to prove that the accused Bhag Singh in collusion with co-accused Gurminder Singh forged an appointment letter Ex.PW3/A for the post of L.D.C. in the Board of School Education, Haryana and the accused Bhag Singh handed over the same to co-accused Gurminder Singh knowing fully well that the said letter Ex.PW3/A is forged and used the same as genuine and the accused Gurminder Singh used the said forged letter Ex.PW3/A as genuine for joining the post of L.D.C. in Board of School Education, Haryana, Bhiwani and accused Bhag Singh Premi committed offence punishable under Section 465, 467, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and the accused Gurminder Singh committed an offence punishable under Section 471 of the Indian Penal Code and they be held guilty and convicted accordingly.” Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact the petitioner was a victim. He was cheated and was made to part Rs.10,000/- and the real culprit was Bhag Singh Premi. The trial Court, without dealing with this aspect, made a generalized observation that from the evidence of PW-1 to PW-7, the documents relied upon and the confessional statement Ex.PA made by Gurminder Singh, it is proved that he had used a forged appointment letter as genuine one. The approach of the trial Court is too mechanical and devoid of any appreciation of evidence. How a letter Ex.PA written by Dr.Mahavir Singh complainant can be termed as a confessional statement of the accused. The petitioner at the outset had stated that he had received this appointment letter. He believed it to be a genuine one. He was a truthful person. He stated that 6 Criminal Revision No.148 of 2002 Bhag Singh Premi received Rs.10,000/- from him and he was cheated. In fact the petitioner was a victim, an innocent person, who fell into the trap of a conman Bhag Singh Premi. This aspect has also not been considered by the lower appellate Court. In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that as a matter of abundant caution, benefit of doubt can be extended to the petitioner and he is to be acquitted of the charges. Consequently, present revision petition is accepted and conviction and sentence of the petitioner is hereby set aside. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 17, 2010 rps 7