490 m1a Criminal Revision No881 of 2003 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB 8 HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH m C Criminal Revision N01881 of 2003 0 Date of Decisionl November Il 2009 1 C3 0 Subhash Chander Kapoor ae e Petitioner I VERSUS State of Punjab espondent Z C 1 Whether the Reporters of Local Newspapersmay be allowed to see the judgment7 I 08 2 e To be referred to the Reportersor not7 3 Whether the judgmentshould be reported in the DigeSt2 m Z QUORUM HONBLE MR JUSTICE MOHINDER PAL Present Mr GS Punia Advocate for the petitioner Mr Vishal Munjal Additional Advocate General Punj8b MOHINDER PAL J This revISIOn petition IS directed against he judgment dated 292003 passed by the Iearned Additional Sessions Judge Ludhiana whereby the judgment of conviction and sentence order dated 25 2003 passed by the Judicial MagistrateIst Ciass Ludhiana convicting the petitioner under Section 409 of the Indian PenalCode shortthe Code and Pooja 2012.10.06 15: 59 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 491 0 1 e2e Criminal Revision Noa1881 of 2003 sentencing him to undergo rigorousimprisonmentfor one year and to pay fine of Rs10001 in default whereof to undergofurther rigorousimprisonment for fifteen dayswere Uphelde 1 r The instant case was registered against the 0 petitioner on the complaint of the Additional Sessions Judge 0 Ludhiana As per allegations against the petitioner he failed to I C5 account for the file of the case titled State ve Deeoak Kumar or to trace it out The prosecution against said Deepak Z Kumar had been Iaunched under the Prevention of CorruptionAct 1988 and he had been discharged by the SpecialJudge Ludhiana for want of proper sanction The prosecution thereafter X c45 filed a fresh challan against Deepak Kumar and as such the r previousfile was also required by the Court However the same 7 was nottraceable An inquiry was conducted by Mr PS Bajaj Z the then SpecialJudge Ludhiana to trace out the said file and he concluded that the petitioner who was workingas Ahlmad in the Court of the Special ludge Ludhiana at the relevant time had received the Iost file from the CopyingAgency on 211994 and had Iater on failed to account for it or to trace it out The petitioner allegedly did not cooperate in the inquiry and it Ied to the registrationof the present case against him The petitioner was arrested and after completionof investigation challan against him was submitted in the Court The petitioner was charged under Section 409 of the Code He did not plead guilty to the charge and claimed trial At the trial the prosecution examined Assistant Sub Pooja 2012.10.06 15: 59 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 492 r Q 8 Criminal Revision N001881 of 2003 R Inspectorinder Kumar PWl Assistant Sub Inspector Mohan Lal PW21 Mr AmarjitSinghSodhi District and Sessions Judge Retd Ludhiana PW3 Kirpal Singh Copyist AVAl Kamaljit 1 Q SinghAhlmad PIA51 Dharampa1Reader PW6l Ramesh Negi 0 retired Superintendent of the omce of the District and Sessions C 3udge Ludhiana PW7 Assistant Sub Inspector Hakam Singh I C5 PW81 Mr GS Khurana District and Sessions Judge Ietd I Ludhiana W and Mr Lakhbir Singh the then Additional Z District and Sessions JudgeLudhiana N 101 After the closure of the prosecution evidence statement of the was recorded under S6ction I 08 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he inter alia stated as underl m Z Il I was not posted in the Special Court of Ll Shri ASa Sodhi and I was not dealingwith the relevant record I was not entrusted with the judicialfile of criminal case titled State Vse Deepak Kumar from Dharampal I want to summon record of my posting as on 21994 and also want to tender Ietter of Ld District a Sessions Judge Shri SS Arora dated 1 4 2000 I have not misappropriatedany of the judicialfile and I also want to tender other relevant record Pooja 2012.10.06 15: 59 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 493 61 4 Criminal Revision No881 of 2003 The petitioner in defence examined Jagt8rSingh 3unior Assistant Office of the District Attorney District Courts Ludhiana DWlJ and Kamal Krishan EnglishClerk in the office of the 1 tr District and Sessions Judge Ludhiana DW2J e 0 I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and C have gone through the records of the case I 0 The soie point to be examined in this case is as to I whether the file in question was handed over to the petitioner Z on 211994 or not and the question whether he dishonestlymisplaced the same comes Iater The petitioner denied the allegationof dishonestly misplacing the fite Ill 08 question and took the stand that on the relevant date he was not posted as Ahlmad in the Court of the Special Judge WmJ Ludhiana Service Book of the petitioner is Exhibit P1 Z accordingto which he remained posted as Ahlmad in the Court tl of Mr AS Sodhi Additional District and Sessions JudgeIme SpecialJudge Ludhiana from l61993 to 1081993 As per Service Book Exhibit P 11 after his transfer from the Court of the SpeciaiJudge Ludhiana the petitioner remained posted with the Court of Mr GS Khurana Additional Disltrict and Sessions Judge Ludhiana from 118 1994 to 309 1994 Besides Kamai Krishan DW21 who was EngIishCierk in the office of the District and Sessions Judge Ludhiana produced Pay Bill Exhibit DNV2181of the staff attached with the Special Judge Ludhiana according to which Kesav Lal Sethiwas the Reader Harish Batra was the Stel Gurnam Singh was Translator Ajay Kuamr Setia was Ahlmad Pooja 2012.10.06 15: 59 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document 494 Q 5 Criminal Revision N0e1881 of 2003 Ashwani Kumar was Additional Ahlmad and Avtar Singhwas Copy Clerk in the Court of the SpecialJudge Ludhiana in September 1994 Pay Bill Exhibit DW 2181of the staff attached with the m SpecialJudge Ludhiana aiso shows that Smt Sudarshan Modi 0 was the Special Judge in September1994 The only evidence C regarding the receipt of the file in question by the petitioner IS I C5 the statement of KirpalSingh Copyist 4WAl who proved the I entry Exhibit ANlIAIA and stated that he had handed over Z the said file to the petitioner It IS worth mentioning here that the petitioner was prejudiced when his prayer for 0 exami n ing the Ha ndwritingExpert to prove that the entry I 08 Exhibit AWAIAJ was not in his handwriting was not acceded to by the trialCour n7 In view of the above I am of the considered opinion Z that the judgment of conviction and the sentence order Clm passedagainst the petitioner by both the Courts below are not justified and the petitionerdeserves acquittal Consequen this revision petition IS allowed the impugned judgmentof conviction and the sentence order are set aside and the petitionerIS acquittedof the chargeframed against him November il 2009 MOHINDER PAL O 1 ak JUDGE r6 3 r Pooja 2012.10.06 15: 59 True Scanned Copy Of The Original PHHC,Chandigarh JOYTI RANI 2016.03.28 16:21 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document