CRL.R.NO.1857 of 2010 #1# IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRL.R.NO.1857 of 2010 (O&M) DATE OF ORDER: 14.7.2010 Jagir Kaur and others .....Petitioners vs. Jaswinder Singh ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASWANT SINGH Present: Mr. H.S. Batth, Advocate for the petitioners. JASWANT SINGH, J Crl.M.No.34351 of 2010 Application is allowed as prayed for. Crl.R.No.1857 of 2010 Present revision petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C has been filed by the petitioners challenging order dated 16.4.2010 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran exercising revisional powers, whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial under Sections 420/120-B IPC in criminal complaint dated 11.7.2005 titled Jaswinder Singh v. Gurdial Singh and others. Briefly, the facts are that Jaswant Singh, Niranjan Singh and Gurdial Singh residents of village Mianwind, Tehsil Khadur Sahib, District Tarn Taran are brothers. Jaswant Singh, who is unmarried and issueless, is allegedly mentally retarded/of unsound mind and has become partially CRL.R.NO.1857 of 2010 #2# blind. It is further alleged that on 3.1.2005, Gurdial Singh in connivance with the petitioners got 6 acres of land in the ownership of Jaswant Singh, fraudulently transferred in his name. This transfer deed was attested by Sarpanch Jagir Kaur-petitioner No.1, Lambardar Piara Singh-petitioner No.2 and Ajit Singh-petitioner No.3 and was registered by the Tehsildar Hansa Singh. Jaswinder Singh S/o Niranjan Singh filed a civil suit for declaration that the transfer of the said land qua the sale deeds executed by Jaswant Singh in favour of Gurdial Singh is illegal and void. Jaswinder Singh besides filing the civil suit also filed present complaint before SDJM, Tarn Taran against Gurdial Singh, present petitioners and the Tehsildar Hansa Singh under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC. Learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Tarn Taran vide order dated 31.10.2006, on consideration of preliminary evidence, found sufficient grounds to summon accused Gurdial Singh only for having committed an offence under Section 420 IPC by dishonestly inducing Jaswant Singh for executing the sale deed in his favour in respect of the share in the land. Against the non- summoning of rest of the petitioners-accused and Tehsildar Hansa Singh, complainant filed revision petition under Section 397 Cr.P.C before the ld. Additional Sessions Judge, Tarn Taran. Learned Revisional Court vide its order dated 16.2.2010 has found that the ld. Trial Court has not given any reasoning while dismissing the complaint against the petitioners-accused and accordingly set aside the order to that extent, by accepting the revision. As a result, the petitioners along with Tehsildar Hansa Singh have been ordered to be summoned under Sections 420/120-B IPC to face trial. Hence, the present revision petition under Section 401 Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has argued that there is no medical evidence of CRL.R.NO.1857 of 2010 #3# competent authority declaring Jaswant Singh of unsound mind and in any case, the petitioners were not the beneficiaries of the sale deeds and that they had only identified the said Jaswant Singh as being the correct person and, therefore, no offence is made out against them. After hearing learned counsel for the petitioners, I find that the plea of the petitioners cannot be accepted. There is sufficient evidence on record, which sustain the order of summoning of the accused-petitioners. CW3-Dr. Ravinder Mohan Sharma, who was a member of the Board of Doctors, had medically examined Jaswant Singh, on the orders of the Court and had submitted the report Ex.P1. He has proved that Jaswant Singh was not of sufficient I.Q, who could manage himself or his property independently. His condition of feeble mindedness was by birth and was not curable. CW1-Jaswinder Singh, CW2 Niranjan Singh have supported the case as set out in the complaint. CW4-Gurpartap Singh has deposed that Jaswant Singh is mentally challenged since birth and could not take decision by himself. Petitioner No.1-Jagir Kaur,who is the Sarpanch and petitioner No.3-Ajit Singh are residents of the village of the complainant as well as village of Jaswant Singh and it cannot be entertained by any stretch of reasoning that they were not aware about the condition of Jaswant Singh. Petitioner No.3-Piara Singh is a Lambardar of an adjoining village of the complainant party at a distance of about 10/12 kms and being a position holder and respectable of the area, it can safely be presumed that he was knowing the mental condition of Jaswant Singh. Even otherwise, it can safely be inferred that during his interaction with Jaswant Singh in the process of execution of the sale deed, he would have noticed that Jaswant Singh was mentally challenged. It is the onerous duty of the revenue CRL.R.NO.1857 of 2010 #4# officials like Lambardar and the Sarpanch to ascertain that the persons/villagers for whose identity, they are attesting, are legally competent to execute the documents in order to protect the interest of the innocent villagers and ensure that no fraud is committed on them. Because of the position they hold, that while registration of various documents their attestation as witnesses is preferred and, therefore, it is expected that they perform their duties in a fair, diligent and honest manner. In the opinion of this Court, no fault can be found with the approach adopted by the ld. Additional Sessions Judge in summoning the petitioners-accused. Dismissed. July 14, 2010 ( JASWANT SINGH ) manoj JUDGE