ii§CELIA §§ij§ ??Ei\i. N6 I >§ / $ii - Wma - %§*13c‘gawa, T" i iii /[ ?v‘:aiwc'ifaga€ri ,EiSfi — Kéfia (£36.) VE?‘ ES 11 ‘\ aammmw... 3?UNUEN i§ E n: J, , — * ’iv/ UI’IIIEU il'lUla WISUFEFICE DOmpany Branch near §am iviandir, Ambikapur D1511 SargujaiCéj \ ”MB-“ J m, m .—» n m "ill$ui§I Ui d€€ii i‘lU U.“ 13 W 2. Ram Praiap 3'6 E‘mreiaé, 2" ‘ f_ ~ Agea n,,,:_x,_,‘(a.a aDout 4t) year, .,V vucupauon ha, ,jn, - firi‘v‘ér’, Rié Viiia§é — S‘r‘rariwa’r’aiii, C‘r‘ m — Saai’aé aiia — $ur-aj ‘u‘f, ' Safajpur, Ei§ti$érgujé(b.G.) :54“- _= =-_‘ _ .._ 5 :s am ‘UiiVcI 0i d€¢p {‘30 v.5 10 U3éi _ 4) émar $ir1g'r': $70 §huk=r1ai *Sirwg‘n Agéci 356m 24 year, {323% J3€mé Wt: Viiiagé - iiuria‘ééihx, Tir‘xar‘a — iiiii'miiii, ?§?’1§i§ — SUfajpur Sigfi $ar’gujai‘6’no.) \uy-mer ai‘ Jeep :“ia éfa f5 ii§§5$ \pin m\ HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CORAM: Hon’ble Shri LM. Quddusi, J. 85 Hon’ble Shri Prashant Kumar Mishra, J. 7’ M.A. No. 1351 of 2004 APPELLANTS I Kuman Singh and another a C Versus ; RESPONDENTS United India Insurance Company 8r, others APPEAL UNDER SECTION 173 OF THE MOTOR VEHICLES ACT, 1988 t ‘ Dr. S‘Eallesh’Ahuja, counsel for the appellants. Shri H.B. Agrawal, Senior Advocate with Ms. Sarina Khan, counsel for the nespondent No. 1. Shri Atanu Ghosh; counsel for respondent No. 2. Shri Rajendra Tripathi, Panel Lawyer for the State. Sxnt. Fouzia Mirza, Assistant Solicitor General for C.B.I. ORAL ORDER (04/04/201 1) the L. Following oral‘ order of I. M. Quddusi, J. ’ Court was passed by ‘The instant appeal has been filed by the appellants Kuman Singh and Smt. Sahoderi, challenging the impugned award dated 21.8.2004, passed by the Second Additional Motor Accident Claims Tribunal (F.T.C.) Soorajpur in Claim Case No.2‘3/2'o03. iBrief facts, in nutshell, are that the appellants had filed a claim case for award of a total compensation of Rs.54,30,000/~ before the Tribunal on the ground that they are parent of Ravi Singh, J who died in a motor accident on 2.2.2003 at 5.30 p.rn. near Bhanwrahi Sarhad beCause of the rash and negligent driving of the Jeep, bearing registration No. .M.P. 273/5085, by its driver that is non—applicant No<2 (Ram ératap). It was stated by the claimants (present appellants) that at the time‘of death their son Ravi Singh was aged about 25 years and was earning W ‘Rs.8000/— p.m. The criminal case arising out of the accident was pending in the Court at Soorajpur at Crime No.61 /2003. At the time of accident the offending vehicle was insured With the nonaapplicant No.1 (United India Insurance Company 5 Limited), Whereas the non-applicant No.2 (Ram Pratap) was the driver and non—applicant No.3 (Amar Singh) was the owner of ithe vehicle. Before the Tribunal only the Insurance Company §contested the matter, whereas the driver and owner remained iex parte. ‘In support of their claim case the appellants examined lthemselves and their witness Jaljeet Singh. The appellants had filed their claim petition through their counsel namely Shri Virendra Gurjar and Shri G.S. Mishra, who filed their vakalatnama on 13.3.2003. 5. Sinée learned’l‘ribunal was suspicious about the conduct of the claimants, the matter was got investigated through the Sub Divisional Officer, Manendragarh, District Koria to ascertain as ito whether the appellants/claimants are. real parents of the deceased Ravi Kumar, Caste-Gond, aged about 25 years, R/o Village — Bardar, Police Station — Khadganwan, Tahsil Manendragarh and whether said Ravi Kumar was married or ot. The S.D.M. submitted his report on 30.4.2004 and 8.6.2004 that deceased Ravi Singh was not the real son of' Kuman Singh. Shri Virendra Gurjar, learned counsel appearing for the appellants/claimants before the Tribunal had produced the photo copy and original of school leaving certiiicate (transfer certificate) 0f deceased Ravi .Singh from the Govt. Primary School, Mendra. In order to examine the veracity of the school leaving certificate, learned Tribunal directed the Head Master of the School to produce relevant record. Accordingly, Shri Vijay Kumar Shandilya, Shiksha Karmi of the school appeared before the Trlbunal along With the record and deposed that the record does not indlcate even about the adm1ss10n of Ravr Singh 1n their school. On the application filed under Section 140 cf the Motor Vehicles Act, 1988 vide order dated 20.12.2003 learned Tribunal had r n ‘ awarde Rs.50,000/— as an interim. The Insurance Company had deposited the said amount on 29.4.2004 and in spite of that no steps for withdrawal of the amount were taken by the appellants / claimants. In view of the above facts and circumstances learned v Tribunal reached 'to the conclusion that the claim petition filed by the claimants was false and fabricated. Thus, vide impugned award dated 21.8.2004 learned Tribunal dismissed the claim petition : 3 and directed for prosecution of the present appellants/claimants and their witness Jaljeet Singh for the offence under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code before the u Chief r- Judicial Magistrate, Surguja, Ambikapur. The claimants/appellants dared to file the instant appeal challenging the award, dismissing the claim petition. The appellants have preferred this appeal on 21.12.2004 through their counsel‘Dr., Shailesh Ahuja, Smt. Anju Ahuja and Shri Ritesh Ahuja. Having regard to the facts situation, this Court on 5.10.2010 assed the following order: “The M.A.C.T‘ concerned has dismissed the claim case filed by the persons who were not the parents of the deceased namely Ravi who died in an accident in question. Therefore, we feel it necessary to summon both the appellants in person. We direct the learned counsel for the appellants to produce the appellants namely Kuman Singh, son of Sukul . ”Singh (and Smt. Sahodari, wife of Kuman Singh, both residents of village Bardar, P.S. Khadgawa, TahsiLManendragarh, District Koria (CG) in person on the next date i.e. 19th of October, 2010.” 11. Further, on 22.10.2010 the statement of appellant No.1 Kuman Singh was recorded andin View of the averments made by the appellantk No.1, witness‘Jaljeet‘iSing/h was summoned. The statement of Jaljeet Singh was recorded on 10.11.2010. On perusal pf the statements made by Appellant No. 1 Kuman Singh \\ d ‘ i j i ‘ l p ‘ ‘ iand w1tness ; Jajjeet .. Smgn . , 1t .‘ 1s . ev1dent . that they are pontradictory to each other and also their statements made ibefore the Tribunal are also contradictory. iorder dated 2.12.2010 this Court formed the opinion t'hat the ~ imatter should be investigated by the Central Bureau of }Investigation (C.B.I.). Therefore, the Registry was directed to ‘ §C0ns1der1ng . . the above facts and C1rcurnstances . of the case, vxde . fprovide copies of all the papers to the Superintendent of Police, lCentral Bureau of Investigation, Bhilai, who shall refer the imatter to the appropriate Officer for investigation and the i preliminary report may be submitted within three months along with status report by the C.B.I. In pursuance to the said order dated 2.12.2010 the Central Bureau ‘of Investigation (C.B.I.) submitted it’s Preliminary Report and recorded its findings in paragraphs 4.29, 5, 5.1 and 5.2 which are quoted as under :- "4.29 Sh. Kuman Singh (suspect) has also been examined during the enquiry and during his initial statement he stated that he was appointed as Assistant Development Extension Officer (ADEO/Gram Sevak) on 29.1 1-. 1964 in the State Govt. and retired from the same post on 31.01.2001. During this period he remained posted at different places. He got married to- one Sahodri Devi daughter of Ram Dayal R/o Bari P.S. Khadagwa, Distt—Koria in the year 1957—58. Out of this wedlock he had five children (3 sons namely Rajkumar, Shiv Kurnar and Shravan Kumar and 2 daughters namely Asha and Malti). He has further stated that while he was posted at Lelunga (Raigarh) during the year 1972-1977 he had developed an illicit relationship with a lady whose name too was Sahodri who was working in his house. Out of this relation, a son was born whose name was Ravi Singh. After his transfer. from Lelunga the said lady had desertedf-him. He‘staterd that the boy (Ravi Singh) was brought up by him. RaviiSingh worked as a Khalasi on different buses/trucks.V Shri Kuman Singh Claimed that the above fact was not known to any of his Villagers. After his retirement he (suspect) returned to his ancestral village (Bardar) but the boy (Ravi Singh) never came to the Village. But O subsequently when he was confronted with the other witnesses and the evidences available on record, he admitted his guilt and stated that deceased Ravi l Singh was not his son and in fact he was Ghuran Singh s/o Mohan Singh r/o Vill. Kulharia, PS Pasan, Distt. Korba Chhattisgarh. He came to him in the year 1997 at village Orgi and narrated the killing a e incident. Ghuran had also told him that he had run away from the Village as the police is looking for him in c/w the murder of his uncle (Dhan Singh) and Nephew (Brijpal). He (Kuman Singh) gave him shelter and changed Guran’s name as Ravi Singh to hide his identity and to save him from Police. After his retirement in the year 2001, Kuman Singh came back to his native place i.e. Village Bardar and Ghura stayed here and there. 5 Conclusion : 5.1 i The enquiry made so far has clearly established that deceased Ravi Singh was not the son of Kuman Singh‘and in fact, was Ghuran Singh s/o Mohan Singh r/o Vill. Kulharia, PS Pasan, Distt. Korba. He (Ghuran Singh) after, the killing incident in the year 1997, ran away from his village and I’eached to Kuman Singh. Kuman Singh not only provided him shelter but also changed his name as Ravi Singh, to hide him from local Police and after his death in the year 2003, filed a false compensation claim in the court of Motor Accident Claim Tribunal, Surajpur, by Way of fraudulent means. 5.2 The field enquiry is complete. Only CFSL Report/ Opinion is-awaited. "Final Status Report shall be filed after as soon as CFSL opinion, regarding comparison of photographs, is obtained.” n 14. ‘ In View of the above conclusion made in the Preliminary Report of the C.B.I., it has been established that deceased Ravi Singh was not son of Kurnan Singh/appellant and the deceased was ‘ in fact Ghuran Singh S/o Mohan Singh, R/o village Kulharia, P.S. Pasan, District — Korba, who after killing incident in the year 1997 ran away from his village and reached to Kuman Singh. Appellant Kuman Singh provided him shelter and also changed his name as Ravi Singh to hide him from local police and after his death; he filed a false claim petition in the MACT concerned. When the claim petition was dismissed he dared to i ‘file the instant appeal’before this Court, therefore, we are of the opinion that the C.B.I. should register case/cases against Kuman Singh or other persons whose involvement is apparent in‘the commission of the crime and proceed against him/them in accordance with law. i m i 15. We are conscious about the provisions of Section 210 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which provides for procedure to be followed when there is a complaint case and police investigation in respect of the same offence. Though a complaint case is pending before the AJ.C.J.M. Soorajpur, being Criminal Case No. 511 /2004, for trial of the offence punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467 and 193 ofthe I.P.C. under the directions of the Claims Tribunal under Section 340 of the Cr.PIC., but sub— section (1) of Section 343 of the Cr.P.C. provides that a ’0 Magistrate to whom a complaint is made under section 340 or section 341 shall, notwithstanding anything contained in Chapter XV, proceed, as far as may be, to deal with the case as if it were instituted on a police report. The complaint case, being Criminal Case No. 511/2004, is already pending against the appellants 85 others before the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Soorajpur, District - Surguja, Ambikapur, as directed by the Claims Tribunal. However, since the CB1. would investigate the case, asgdirected by this Court, we are of the opinion, let the C.B.I. proceed for investigation and the A.C.J.M. Soorajpur should not proceed further in complaint . *\ / i case, being Criminal Case No. 511/2004, till the investigation ‘ by the C..B.I. is concluded and report under Section 173 of the Cr.P.C. is filed before the Special Court for trying the C.B.I. i cases i.e. A.C.J.M. and Presiding Officer for C.B.I. Cases, Raipur l (Chhattisgarh). The C.B.I. shall inform the Court of A.C.J.M. i Soorajpur after filing of the report under Section 173 of the l Cr.P.C. and in that event the A.C.J.M. Soorajpur shall remit the ‘ l record of the Criminal Case No. 511 /2004 to the Special Court, l as above. l6. fWith the above directions, this appeal which has been flled ‘ fraudulently by the claimants/appellants is dismissed. l7. A copy of this order shall be supplied to the Assistant Solicitor General for further action. Certified copy‘as per rules. Sd/_ i’ff‘ sal- I.M.Quddusi ‘ t Kuma!‘ Misma Judge Prasha“ w kL Judge Kamde/ Gowri