Partly allowed

Ganga Singh v. State of Hy.

Punjab & Haryana HC5 Mar 2009CRR/374/2002

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court disposed of criminal revision petitions filed by petitioners convicted for forging bail orders to release others. Some petitioners died during pendency, leading to abatement. For aged, surviving petitioners, the original sentences were reduced to the period already undergone.

What did the court decide?

Revision petitions dismissed with modification; sentences of Jagat Singh and Nathu Singh reduced to the period already undergone; petition of Raj Kumar rejected; petitions of deceased petitioners abat

Ganga Singh Vs State of Hy. — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2009)

¶1

[1]

¶2

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶3

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002 Date of decision: 5.03.2009

¶5

Ganga Singh and another

¶6

.......Petitioners

¶7

versus

¶8

The State of Haryana

¶9

.......Respondent

¶10

CRR No. 700 of 2002

¶11

Narain Singh and others

¶12

.....Petitioners

¶13

versus

¶14

State of Haryana .....Respondent

¶15

Before: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N.JINDAL

¶16

Present: Mr. N.S.Shekhawat, Advocate for the petitioners.

¶17

Mr. Amit Khatkar, AAG, Haryana

¶18

A.N.JINDAL, J

¶19

This judgment shall dispose of CRR No. 374 of 2002 and CRR No.700 of 2002 arising out of judgment dated 12.02.2002.

¶20

All the fourteen accused have been tried for the offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code . The allegations against them are that they forged fake bail orders for the release of the accused namely Ravinder, Satbir, Krishan Kumar, Shiv Kumar and Vijay purported to have been passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.S.Grewal , Judge, Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crl.Misc. No. 9923-M of 1990, Crl. Misc. 9924-M of 1990, Crl. Misc. No. 10314-M of 1990 and Crl.Misc. 10315 of 1990 in the cases first information reports bearing numbers 105 and 108, respectively presented the same before the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani and got released the aforesaid persons on bail in both the

¶21

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶22

[2]

¶23

cases on the basis of procured sureties. On trial, court of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate vide its judgment dated 5.02.2000 acquitted Dhani Ram and Ashok Kumar whereas convicted and senteced Ravinder, Shiv Kumar, Krishan Kumar alias Kalu, Satbir and Vijay Kumar to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs, 3000/- each, under Section 468 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code and they were further sentenced to under go rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/each under Section 471 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code.

¶24

The remaining petitioners namely Ganga Singh, Ramesh Kumar, Narain Singh, Nathu Singh, Jagat Singh and Raj Kumar were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/- each under Section 471 read with Section 120-B of Indian Penal Code.

¶25

The allegations, in nutshell, are that Ravinder son of Jagat Singh , Shiv Kumar, Krishan alias Kalu son of Motan Dass, Satbir Singh, Vijay Kumar son of Bhurji Singh were confined in jail at Bhiwani in two criminal cases FIR No. 105 dated 24.07.1989 and FIR No. 108 dated 26.07.1989 registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Bhiwani for different offences including the offence under Sections 304, 328, 326, 120B, 109, 201 of the Indian Penal Code. It is alleged that in order to get themselves released on bail, all the above-named accused, while entering into a criminal conspiracy, forged bail orders, purported to have been passed by Hon'ble Mr. Justice S.S.Grewal, Judge, Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in Crl. Misc. No. 9923-M of 1990, 9924-M of 1990, Crl.Misc. No. 10314-M of 1990 and Crl. Misc. No. 10315-M of 1990, in both the cases bearing FIRs Nos. 105 and 108, and presented the same in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani whereupon accused Narain Singh and Ramesh Kumar stood

¶26

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶27

[3]

¶28

sureties and furnished their bail bonds for release of Ravinder on 18.09.1990 in case FIR No. 105 and 108 respectively. Similarly, accused Jagat Singh furnished such bail bonds in favour of Shiv Kumar in both cases on 8.10.1990. Smt. Rampiyari(not challaned by the police) and accused Raj Kumar furnished bail bonds in favour of accused Krishan Kumar alias Kalu on 6.10.1990. Accused Bhim Singh (died during the trial of the case) and Nathu Singh furnished their bail bonds in favour of accused Satbir on 8.10.1990 whereas Ganga Singh furnished such bail bonds in both the cases in favour of accused Vijay Singh on 8.10.1990.

¶29

When the matter came to the notice of Shri M.K.Bansal, learned District and Sessions Judge, Bhiwani(PW-9), he reported the matter to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Bhiwani on which, case FIR No. 282, dated 22.11.1991, was registered against the accused under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code and was investigated. After the completion of Investigation, Challan was presented against fourteen accused as referred to above.

¶30

Charges under Sections 466/120-B, 417/120-B, 468/120-B and 471/120-B of the Indian Penal Code were framed against the accused.

¶31

During trial prosecution examined nine witnesses. In their statements under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, they denied all the allegations and pleaded their false implication. Ultimately except Dhani Ram and Ashok Kumar, all the accused were convicted and sentenced accordingly. Their appeals were also dismissed.

¶32

Narain Singh, Nathu Singh and Raj Kumar pereferred the Crl. Revision No. 700 of 2002 and Ganga Singh and Jagat Singh preferred a separate Crl. Revision No. 374 of 2002 which are disposed of together.

¶33

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶34

[4]

¶35

I was also informed that Ganga Singh died in the year 2008 and Narain Singh died on 26.04.2007 i.e. during the pendency of the present revision petition.

¶36

There is no appeal relating to Ravinder, Shiv Kumar, Krishan alias Kalu, Satbir Singh, Vijay Kumar and Ramesh Kumar before me for disposal.

¶37

While taking notice of the fact that the Jagat Singh and Nathu Singh appeared as sureties, both being in old age and are in the evening of their lives and that they had already undergone more than two months of sentence, learned counsel has pleaded for extending some leniency in the quantum of their sentence. As regards Raj Kumar accused, it has been urged that he has not committed any offence and no sufficient evidence has been led against him in order to connect him with the crime. It was also strenuously argued that it was only Dhani Ram who had perpetrated the crime but for want of evidence, he has been acquitted.

¶38

Having deliberated over the aforesaid contentions. Before taking into consideration the old age of the Jagat Singh and Nathu Singh, the merits of the case need to be touched. There is no denying a fact that Ravinder, Shiv Kumar, Krishan Kumar alias Kalu, Satbir and Vijay Kumar were accused in the FIR No. 105 dated 24.07.1989 and in case FIR No. 108 of 26.07.1999 for the offence under Sections 304, 328, 336, 120-B, 109 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code. Documents Ex.PW-1/A to PW1/H reveal that the bail orders dated 14.09.1990 in Crl.Misc. Writ No. 10314-M of 1990 and orders dated 1.10.1990 in Crl. Misc. Writ No. 10315-M of 1990 were never passed by the Punjab and Haryana High Court, Chandigarh on the basis of which they have been released on bail.

¶39

The documents further reveal that in pursuance to the

¶40

[5]

¶41

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶42

aforesaid forged orders, the petitioners filed bail applications before Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate , Bhiwani through different advocates and on the basis of the aforesaid forged orders they got the aforesaid accused released on bail. The bail bonds so furnished reveal that Ashok Kumar, Ganga Singh, Ramesh Kumar, Narain Singh, Jagat Singh, Bhim Singh and Raj Kumar furnished the bail bonds. Ravinder, Shiv Kumar, Krishan Kumar, Satbir and Vijay Kumar were the beneficiaries.

¶43

Raj Kumar etc. had no relationship with the accused and they had no occasion to furnish the bail and surety bonds but all this happened as they had joined with the accused to get them released. Not only that they become sureties, they instructed Shri. V.C.Sanghi, Om Parmar, Smt. Poonam Sangwan,(Advocates) to file applications in pursuance to the orders purported to have been passed by the High Court. No direct evidence is available for proving conspiracy but the documents speak for themselves that the appellants Raj Kumar, Ganga Singh, Narain Singh, Jagat Singh and Ramesh Kumar(nonapplicant) and Nathu Singh appeared as sureties for releasing the accused Ravinder etc.

¶44

Now coming to the quantum of sentence, it may be observed that Ramesh Kumar is not before me in these two revision petitions. Records further reveal that Nathu Singh was 66 years old and Jagat Singh was 78 years old at the time of Commission of the crime. As such now after 18 years they must be quite old and counting days in the evening of their lives. I am further informed that Narain Singh died on 26.04.2007 and Ganga Singh has died in the year 2008. Both Nathu Singh and Jagat Singh have already undergone two months of rigorous imprisonment. As such in these peculiar circumstances, these two petitions need to be dealt with

¶45

[6]

¶46

CRR NO. 374 OF 2002

¶47

leniency so that they may pass the remaining period of their lives in solitude and repentence as such it would not be in the fitness of things to send them back to the prison at this stage. So far as Narain Singh and Ganga Singh are concerned they have died. Therefore, the revision petitions qua them stand abated, however, no leniency could be extended in the case of Raj Kumar.

¶48

Accordingly, these two revisions are dismissed with the modification in the sentence qua Jagat Singh and Nathu Singh by reducing the same to that of already undergone by them and revision petition qua Raj Kumar petitioner is rejected.

¶49

Copy of the judgment be sent to the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani for compliance. He would also verify if Ganga Singh and Narain Singh have already died and if the answer is in negative then the revision petitions filed qua them would also be treated as dismissed.

¶50

[A.N.JINDAL] JUDGE

¶51

5^th March, 2009 SKaushik

Ganga Singh v. State of Hy.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Ganga Singh v. State of Hy.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

(O&M)Kuldeep Singh Dhillon Vs Preetinder Kaur Thind

(O&M)Karam Singh Vs Ms.Shashi Kala Benvait and Anr.

Yaqub Masih Vs Shashi Kala

Raghubir Singh Vs State of Haryana

Sham Lal Vs State of Haryana

Lilu Ram and Ors. Vs State of Haryana