SATBIR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This order proposes to dispose of two criminal revision petitions filed by two co-accused against the same impugned judgments of conviction and order of sentence. First is Criminal Revision No. 484 of 2012 (Satbir Vs. State of Haryana ) and the second revision petition is Criminal Revision No. 632 of 2012 (Jamna Devi Vs. State of Haryana) . However, the facts for the facility of reference are being culled out from Criminal Revision No. 484 of 2012.

(2.) Shorn of detailed background of the case, it would suffice to mention the basic facts. Upon receipt of an application from Smt. Shalini Nagpal, the then Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Rohtak, addressed to Station House Officer, Police Station, Civil Lines, Rohtak, regarding registration of case against Satbir Singh son of Pokhar, First Information Report ('FIR' for short) for the commission of offence punishable under Sections 419, 205 Penal Code was registered and investigation was carried out. During investigation, accused were arrested. Statements of witnesses were recorded. The allegations against the petitioners were that in civil suit No. 845 of 5.11.1997 titled as Jamna Devi Vs. Rambhaj etc. , when statement was being recorded by Surender, Reader of the Court, under dictation given by the Court, accused-Satbir represented himself as Surender (defendant No.3) and personated to make statement. He also disclosed that he was personating Surender on the asking of the plaintiff-Jamna Devi because Surender had gone to Haridwar. After completion of the investigation, the challan was filed in the court. Finding a prima facie case against the accused under Sections 419, 205 IPC, the challan was filed, accordingly.

(3.) In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined Smt. Shalini Nagpal, Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhiwani as PW-1, Anil Kumar (Summary Ahlmad of the court of the then learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Rohtak) as PW-2, Surender Kumar (Ahlmad to District and Sessions Judge, Rohtak) as PW-3 and Sultan Singh (Advocate) as PW-4. The prosecution placed on record the documents Ex. P-A statement of Satbir Singh, Ex.PB-complaint, Ex. P-1 certified copy of vakalatnama, Ex.P-2 certified copy of the plaint and Ex. PW-4/A statement of Sultan Singh (Advocate). Thereafter, the prosecution evidence was closed. Statements of the accused, were recorded under Sec. 313 Crimial P.C., wherein they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.