JASWINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB & ORS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The contour of the facts, which needs a necessary mention, relevant for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petition and oozing out, from the record, is that Paramjit Singh, brother of main accused Jagdish Singh son of Gurdev Singh, had gone to Italy, six months prior to the present occurrence. Main accused-Jagdish Singh approached and offered complainant Amar Kaur wife of Major Singh, respondent No.2 (for brevity "the complainant") to send her son Kulwinder Singh abroad. He assured to get him permanently settled in Italy with the help of his brother and demanded a sum of Rs. 7/8 lacs in this connection. The complainant carried away with the sweet dreams of sending her son to Italy and the deal was stuck for an amount of Rs.7,50,000/-, out of which, Rs. 6,50,000/-were to be paid in advance and Rs. 1 lac were to be paid on reaching there. Jagdish Singh was stated to have come to her house on 6.9.2006 and she paid him Rs. 4 lacs. She also paid him a sum of Rs. 50,000/- on 12.9.2006, Rs. 50,000/- on 13.9.2006, Rs. 1 lac on 22.9.2006 and finally paid Rs. 50,000/- on 28.9.2006. The entire money was claimed to have been paid to main accused Jagdish Singh by the complainant in the presence of her son, husband and PW Boota Singh. The accused collected all the documents, photographs and assured the complainant that he would send her son Kulwinder Singh abroad very soon, but he failed to fulfill his promise in this respect. When she, her son, husband and PW Boota Singh asked Jagdish Singh accused that in case he was unable to send her son abroad, then he should return the money. Thereafter he started adopting delaying tactics on one pretext or the other.

(2.) In all, the prosecution claimed that main accused Jagdish Singh has cheated the complainant and illegally received the amount. He neither sent Kulwinder Singh to Italy nor returned the money to her. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint (Annexure P3) of complainant, which formed the basis of FIR, the instant case was registered against main accused Jagdish Singh, vide FIR, bearing No.109 dated 16.6.2007 (Annexure P1), on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 467 and 468 IPC by the police of Police Station Jaitu, District Faridkot, in the manner described hereinbefore.

(3.) After the completion of investigation, the police submitted the challan/final police report in terms of Section 173 Cr.PC against main accused Jagdish Singh only. He was accordingly charge sheeted for the commission of indicated offences and the case was slated for evidence of the prosecution. At that stage, Major Singh respondent No.3, husband of the complainant, moved an undated application (Annexure P5) to the SHO, wherein, it was vaguely stated that the present petitioner is also responsible for receipt of payment and for not sending his son to Italy. Subsequently, on the basis of said application, he (petitioner) was involved as an accused in this case as well.