Criminal Revision No.695 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.695 of 2011 Date of decision:-10.5.2011 Nishan Singh and another ...Petitioners Versus State of Haryana ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI Present:- Mr. G.S. Sandhu, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, AAG Haryana. RITU BAHRI J. Challenge in this revision petition is to the order dated 09.3.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal vide which the judgment and order dated 10.3.2011 convicting the petitioner-Nishan Singh to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year each for offence punishable under Sections 417 and 120-B IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.3,000/- for offence punishable under Section 417 IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2,000/- for the offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC; and convicting the petitioner Nirwair Singh to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year each for the offence punishable under Sections 417, 419 and 120-B IPC and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/- for commission of offence punishable under Section 417 IPC, fine of Rs.2000/- for offence under Section 419 IPC and Rs.1000/- for commission of offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC, is upheld. As per the case of the prosecution accused Nirwair Singh son of Surjeet Singh was caught appearing on behalf of Nishan Singh by presenting him Criminal Revision No.695 of 2011 -2- for physical test. A discrepancy was found in the photograph affixed on the Form No.715 GC of Nishan Singh. He could not give any satisfactory reply. Both the courts have convicted the accused on the ground that as per witnesses PW2 Inspector Vijay Kumar and PW4 Sub Inspector Satbir Singh had appeared before the Board, were satisfied that Nirwair Singh impersonated before the Board for physical measurement and was guilty of impersonating Nishan Singh and the Board directed SI Vijay Kumar to initiate legal action. Counsel for the petitioner has challenged the judgment dated 09.3.2011 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal on the ground that an application for bringing on record the fact that Nirwair Singh was also a candidate has been dismissed by the Court is factually incorrect. He has referred to the order dated 22.1.2011 (Annexure P-1) whereby the application for placing on record the documents has been disposed of with the observation that it will taken up at the time of final arguments. It has not been disposed of. It is not believable that when Narwair Singh was himself a candidate, he would impersonated Nishan Singh. There was a scuffle with the police officials at the time of recruitment and this FIR was registered on the grounds of hinges. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the case file carefully. The accused have not taken the stand that they both were candidates at the time of giving their statements under Section 313 Cr.P.C. Statement of Vijay Kumar,Inspector (PW2) that Narwair Singh has appeared and Form No.715/GC was checked is not to be doubted. The members of the Board were also satisfied that Narwair Singh also impersonated Nishan Singh during the recruitment. The judgment and the order of conviction are upheld. The petitioners were sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one year each for offence punishable under Sections 417 and 120-B Criminal Revision No.695 of 2011 -3- IPC with a fine of Rs.3000/-each for offence punishable under Section 417 IPC and Rs.2000/-each for offence punishable under Section 120-B IPC. Further accused Narwair Singh also sentenced simple imprisonment for one year with a fine of Rs.2000/- under Section 419 IPC. Both the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently. As per custody certificate both the convicts have undergone one month and twenty three days as on today. Keeping in view the fact that petitioner Narwair Singh had made an application to place on record the application form which could have been taken into consideration by the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, some benefit of doubt can be extended to Narwair Singh that why would he impersonated Nishan Singh when he was physically fit for the purpose of recruitment and he was an applicant. The prosecution story that Narwair Singh had chosen to impersonate Nishan Singh gets diluted when in the judgment dated 09.3.2011 it has been specifically mentioned that the application for leading additional evidence was dismissed, this is factually incorrect. Both the petitioners are young and they are not habitual offenders. A direction is being given to release them on probation for a period of one year to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Karnal. The criminal revision petition is accordingly disposed of. 10.5.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Vijay Asija JUDGE