IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1176 of 2006 Date of decision: 13.10.2011 Shiv Kumar ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab through CBI ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RANJIT SINGH Present: Mr. Bipin Ghai, Senior Advocate with Ms. Anju Kaushik, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. A.P.S. Deol, Senior Advocate with Mr. Davinder Bir Singh, Advocate for the petitioner (in CRR No. 1162 of 2006) Mr. Sumeet Goel, Advocate for CBI. RANJIT SINGH J. Through this common order, the Criminal Revision Petitions Nos. 1162, 1165, 1168, 1169, 1170 1171, 1176 1208 and 1229 of 2006 are being disposed of as the facts are almost identical and common question of law is involved in these cases. While disposing of the Criminal Appeal, the appellate Court has maintained the conviction and the sentenced awarded under Sections 120-B IPC and 420 IPC to each of the petitioners. The petitioners were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 1½ year and coupled with fine of ` 1,000/- and in default of payment of fine were to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two months. The petitioners were also sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment under Section 120-B IPC. Some of the petitioners have been Criminal Revision No. 1176 of 2006 -2- sentenced to undergo different terms of imprisonment. Since the transaction is similar, the facts as noticed from Criminal Revision No. 1176 of 2006 would suffice. As per the prosecution case, in the year 1979-80, Sh. Narinder Singh Bhatia while working as Branch Manager, Punjab & Sind Bank, Basti Guzan, Jalandhar entered into criminal conspiracy with Sh. Parbhash Chand Jain, Sh. Raj Kumar Jain, Sh. Ramesh Chand Jain, Sh. Nem Chand Jain, Sh. Jaswant Rai Jain, Sh. Basant Kumar, Sh. Suresh Kumar Jain son of Sh. Padam Parshad Jain, Assistant Cashier and Sh. Shiv Kumar with a view to cheat the Bank. In pursuant to the said criminal conspiracy, Sh. Narinder Singh Bhatia advanced loans to Sh. Jaswant Chand, Chaman Lal, Sh. Om Parkash and Sh. Balwant Kaur to purchase Tata Diesel Chassis from M/s P.S. Jain Motors, G.T. Road, Jalandhar. During investigation, it was found that aforesaid borrowers neither booked any chassis of the truck nor they were delivered the chassis. The bank record showed that chassis were shown delivered to these persons. Even some of the borrowers could not be traced during investigation and, accordingly, they were found to be fictitious borrowers. Subsequent instalments of loans were also deposited in the loan accounts by the said firm. The loan amount was disbursed by Sh. Narinder Kumar Bhatia to the borrowers on the day their loan proposals were processed. The petitioners were, accordingly, charge sheeted and on the basis of prosecution evidence stand convicted by the trial Court, which was upheld by the appellate Court. The appellate Court has also maintained the sentence as awarded. Criminal Revision No. 1176 of 2006 -3- Counsel for the petitioner has drawn my attention to the orders passed in similar cases, where some revision petitions were disposed of in the same terms as was ordered in Criminal Appeal Nos. 550-SB of 1995, 542-SB and 579-SB. This Court has upheld the order of conviction of petitioner but the fine was enhanced while the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to the period already undergone. Mr. Bipin Ghai, senior counsel appearing for the petitioner points out that Criminal Revision No. 185 of 2002 titled as Suresh Kumar Jain Versus State of Punjab was disposed of on 06.01.2011 in the above terms and prays that the present case being similar may be disposed of in the same terms. Counsel appearing for the respondent-CBI has not disputed the factual position that various revision petitions have been disposed of by this Court as noted above. The only difference as pointed out by the counsel for the respondent is that the entire amount has still not been paid. This was the position even in Criminal Revision No. 185 of 2002. It was then pointed out before the Court that the proceedings for the recovery of amount were separately pending. This Court had, accordingly, disposed of the said Revision Petition with the direction in the above terms and has fixed the total amount of ` 3 lakhs to be shared equally by the petitioners. The petitioners were directed to deposit the amount before the trial Court within two days from the date of receipt of copy of this order. Adopting the same course, the sentence imposed on the petitioners is reduced to the period already undergone. The Criminal Revision No. 1176 of 2006 -4- petitioner, however, will pay a fine of ` 3,00,000/- in CRR No. 1165 of 2006 and ` 1,85,000/- in CRR No. 1168, 1169, 1170 1171, 1176 1208 and 1229 of 2006, to be equally shared by the petitioners. The petitioners shall deposit the amount of fine imposed before the trial Court within two months from the date of receipt of copy of this order. The present revision petitions are, accordingly, disposed of. October 13, 2011 ( RANJIT SINGH ) rts JUDGE