AVTAR SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE application is allowed and annexed affidavit of respondent No.2-complainat filed pursuant to orders of the preceding dates is taken on record, subject to all just exceptions. Main Case Convicts Avtar Singh and his wife Urvinder Kaur have filed this revision petition to challenge their conviction and sentence ordered by both the Courts below. Petitioners stand convicted under Section 406 IPC and have been sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each and to pay fine of Rs.1,000.00 each.

(2.) PROSECUTION case is that the petitioners invited deposits from public. Different persons deposited amounts in the company of the petitioners. However, the petitioners allegedly misappropriated the same and failed to pay the maturity amount to the depositors. Pursuant to order of this Court, the petitioners have deposited Rs.2,00,000.00 with the registry of this Court. Respondent No.2-complainant was acting as agent of the petitioners for securing deposit in their company. Affidavit of respondent No.2 reveals that he had deposited Rs.2,08,603.00 on behalf of 23 persons including himself as per details given in the affidavit. The complainant has undertaken in the affidavit to pay the amounts of different depositors as per details given in the affidavit. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file.

(3.) CONVICTION of the petitioners is well founded by both the Courts below after analyzing evidence and after recording reasons for convicting the petitioners. Accordingly, conviction of the petitioners, which is also not challenged by them, is upheld. As regards quantum of sentence, the FIR was registered on 10.08.2000 i.e. twelve and half years ago. During this long period, the petitioners have faced agony of trial, including appeal and revision. They have also now paid principal amount of the depositors in question, although after more than fifteen years of the deposit made by them, without interest. Perusal of custody certificate Annexure P-1 reveals that petitioner No.1 has remained in custody for over eleven months whereas petitioner No.2, a female, has remained in custody for almost one month (after adding period upto release on bail ordered vide order dated 03.04.2012).