Criminal Revision No. 1062 of 2004 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No. 1062 of 2004 Date of Decision: March 06, 2009 Jaswant Singh ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mrs. Justice Sabina Present: None for the petitioner. Mr.Amandeep Singh Rai, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab ** Sabina, J. Petitioner-Jaswant Singh was convicted for an offence under Sections 420/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as `IPC') by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class Hoshiarpur vide judgment dated 21.10.2000. Vide order of even date, petitioner was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 420/120-B IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 468/120-B IPC and also to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year under Section 471/120-B IPC along with fine of Rs.120/- under each Sections . Aggrieved by the same, petitioner filed an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Fast Track Court, Hoshiarpur vide order dated 21.4.2004. Hence, the present revision petition. The brief facts of the case, as noticed by the Appellate Court Criminal Revision No. 1062 of 2004 2 in para 2 of its judgment, are as under:- “ The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 20.8.1997, a ruqa was sent by the D.S.P. (Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar) for registration of case against Jaswant Singh accused who was Inspector in the co-operative Socieities at Garhshankar and while impersonating himself of a worker in a private factory earning less than Rs.5000/- per annum in conspiracy with one of the Senior Clerk of Backfinco, namely, Mann Singh, had applied for loan of Rs.20,000/- for construction of house in the year 1992, whereas actually he was serving as a Government employee with a salary of Rs.2463/- per month. Mann Singh, Senior Clerk of Backfinco wrongly certified to be a factory worker. The loan was disbursed and the same was availed by the accused Jaswant Singh in conspiracy with Mann Singh and later on the same was repaid. Jaswant Singh had furnished wrongful information to the Backfinco and had furnished false affidavit that he was earning less than Rs.5000/- per year. On the basis of the ruqa, an FIR No. 76 dated 20.8.1997 under Sections 420/467/471/468/120-B of IPC, Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Jalandhar was registered against both the accused and after thorough and complete investigation, the challan was presented in the trial Court by the D.S.P. Vigilance Bureau, Punjab, Hoshiarpur, who framed the charge under Sections 420/468/471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code against both the accused, who did not plead guilty and claimed trial." I have gone through the record of the case with the able Criminal Revision No. 1062 of 2004 3 assistance of the learned counsel for the State. Prosecution case against the petitioner is that the petitioner, who by impersonating himself as a worker in a private factory earning less than Rs.5000/- per annum in conspiracy with Senior Clerk to Backfinco, had applied for a loan of Rs.20,000/- for construction of a house in the year 1992, whereas, the petitioner was working as Inspector in Co-operative Society at Gurgaon and was earning Rs.2463/- per month. Prosecution, in order to prove its case, examined PW1 Achhar Singh Toor, Tehsildar cum Executive Magistrate who has attested the affidavit of petitioner. PW2 Malkiat Singh deposed with regard to his taking in possession of loan application of the petitioner along with affidavit and other record. PW4 Bakhtawar Singh, Accountant of Cooperative Society proved that the petitioner was getting salary of Rs.2463/- from June 1992 onwards from their Office. Exhibit PA is the affidavit submitted by the petitioner. A perusal of the same reveals that the petitioner had stated in the affidavit that the annual income of his family from all the sources was Rs.5000/-. On the basis of the said affidavit, loan was advanced to the petitioner. The petitioner,when he was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. after the close of the prosecution evidence stated that he had returned the entire loan along with interest. Even as per the prosecution case, the loan taken by the petitioner was later on repaid. Thus, in these circumstances, Courts below had rightly convicted and sentenced the petitioner for an offence under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B IPC. Keeping in view the fact that the loan taken by the petitioner was later on returned by him, it is a fit case where the sentence qua imprisonment is liable to be reduced to already undergone by the petitioner. Criminal Revision No. 1062 of 2004 4 Accordingly, the conviction of the petitioner under Sections 420/468/471/120-B IPC is maintained. However, his sentence qua imprisonment is reduced to already undergone by him. This petition is disposed of accordingly. (Sabina) Judge March 06, 2009 arya