Crl.Rev.No.1865 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Rev.No.1865 of 2010 Date of decision:11.11.2010. Dilbag Singh ....................Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....................Respondents Coram: Hon'ble Mr.Justice Jaswant Singh Present: Mr.JBS Gill,Advocate for the petitioner. Mr.Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala,AAG Punjab. Jaswant Singh.J. The present revision petition is directed against the judgment dated 6.4.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur whereby the appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed and the judgment and order dated 12.1.2009 passed by the learned trial Court convicting and sentencing the petitioner under sections 420, 465,467,471 IPC was upheld. As per case of the prosecution, petitioner by forging a Power of Attorney, had entered into an agreement to sell dated 4.5.2006 with complainant Balwinder Singh in respect of 10 acres of land belonging to Harinder Singh, Gurdeep Singh, Kuldeep Singh and Mrs.Salinder Kaur and received a sum of Rs.5 lacs through cheque, out Crl.Rev.No.1865 of 2010 2 of which he had withdrawn a sum of Rs.4 lacs. The said agreement was witnessed by Malkiat Singh and Joginder Pal. On getting suspicious about the genuineness of the Power of Attorney, complainant made a written complaint to SSP Hoshiarpur. On the basis of said complaint FIR No.18 dated 25.2.2007 under Sections 420,465,467,468,471 IPC was lodged at PS City Hoshiarpur. After investigations challan was presented in Court. Charges were framed under Sections 420,465,467,471 IPC, to which petitioner pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Both sides led evidence. After hearing both sides and perusing the material available on record, learned trial Court convicted the petitioner under Sections 420,465,467,471 and sentenced him to under RI for two years under Section 420 IPC, RI for two years under Section 465 IPC, RI for three years under Section 467 IPC and RI for two years under Section 471 IPC besides payment of fine under each count. Appeal filed by the petitioner was dismissed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge. Hence the present revision petition. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that the conviction of the petitioner is based on discrepant and unreliable prosecution evidence. It is further submitted that it has not been proved on record as to who was the author of alleged power of attorney nor the handwriting/signatures of the petitioner have been compared. It is also submitted that prosecution has neither examined any executant of the power of attorney nor proved the account statement of the petitioner. It is thus, contended that the conviction of the petitioner is bad in the eyes Crl.Rev.No.1865 of 2010 3 of the law as case of the prosecution has not been proved beyond shadow of reasonable doubt. After hearing the learned counsel and going through the impugned orders I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgments. The learned appellate Court while dismissing the appeal has noticed that marginal witnesses namely Malkiat Singh and Joginder Pal have deposed that petitioner-Dilbagh Singh had signed the agreement to sell in their presence and as such there was no need for prosecution to get the handwriting of the petitioner examined. As regards non-examination of executants of the Power of Attorney, proseuction examined PW5 Gulshan Kaur, wife of Captain Harinder Singh. She stated that her husband Harinder Singh, mother-in-law Surinder Kaur, a resident of England, her brother in law Kuldeep Singh, a resident of Canada own 10 acres of land near bridge, Chaggran in the area of Village Bohan. It was further stated by her that photographs on power of attorney Ex.P2 were not of aforesaid persons. As regards the question as to who had authored the forged power of attorney, it has come on record that on the basis of said power of attorney petitioner had entered into an agreement to sell with the complainant and received an amount of Rs.5 lacs through cheque, out of which he had already withdrawn a sum of Rs. 4 lacs. In his defence, no evidence was led by the petitioner. Thus in the face of it, petitioner being the beneficiary of the agreement to sell executed on the basis of Crl.Rev.No.1865 of 2010 4 forged power of attorney, it is evident that he himself was the author of the forged power of attorney and none else. As regards non- examination of any bank official, to prove withdrawal of money by the petitioner, it appears that APP had relied upon statement of PW4 Joginder Singh, Ex Manager, Punjab and Sind Bank as well as photocopy of cheque dated 4.5.2006 for Rs.3 lakhs Ex.PW4/3 issued by complainant. Thus, it cannot be said withdrawal of money from the bank by the petitioner was not proved. In view of the aforesaid discussion, I find no illegality or perversity in the impugned judgments, warranting interference by this Court . Dismissed. 11.11.2010 (Jaswant Singh) joshi Judge