AMRIT SINGH Vs. TARLOCHAN SINGH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal is directed against the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge, Patiala, dated December 14, 1987, by which the appeal filed by the respondents was allowed and their conviction and sentence under Section 406, Indian Penal Code, was set aside and they were also acquitted of the charge under Section 420, Indian Penal Code, and the fine, if paid was ordered to be refunded to them.

(2.) THE facts of the case, briefly stated, are as under :- Amrit Singh, appellant, filed a complaint under Sections 406 and 420, Indian Penal Code, against Gurcharan Singh, his father Tarlochan Singh, his mother Motia Wanti and Mohan Singh, brother-in-law of Tarlochan Singh. It was stated therein that the respondents and Gurcharan Singh in connivance with each other had received a sum of Rs. 28,000/- from the appellant and his friend Nirmal Singh in February, 1983 on the pretext that the appellant would be sent abroad. They had also assured the appellant of foreign employment. They had allegedly received a sum of Rs. 28,000/- from the appellant and his friend Nirmal Singh and took them to Bombay, where both of them were made to stay for three months and eleven days. The respondents and Gurcharan Singh themselves slipped away from Bombay leaving the appellant and his friend behind. The appellant returned to his village. Tarlochan Singh, respondent, sent a telegraphic message to the father of the appellant to the effect that Gurcharan Singh, if in the village, be sent to Bombay. Thereafter the appellant made several attempts to contact the respondents for refund of Rs. 14,000/- given by him to them, in response to which the respondents put them off on various pretexts from time to time. It was further alleged by the appellant that the respondents conspired together to cheat him and his friend of a sum of Rs. 28,000/- on the assurance that some employment would be ensured to the appellant abroad.

(3.) AFTER the summoning of the respondents, the complainant himself appeared as his own witness and reiterated the version as stated by him in the complaint. He also examined his father Sardara Singh (P.W. 2), who corroborated his version.