MANJIT SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present revision petition has been filed by the accused petitioner to challenge the judgment of conviction dated 07.01.2011, whereby, he has been convicted and sentenced for offence punishable under Sections 420, 465, 468 and 471 IPC in case FIR No.154 dated 30.10.2004 registered at Police Station Dinanagar.

(2.) The said judgment of trial Court was also upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court, Gurdaspur vide judgment dated 01.08.2013.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by both the Courts below is contrary to the evidence available on record. He further submits that there was no evidence on record to show that the petitioner had forged the documents of Truck bearing Registration No.HP-38-4231. Learned counsel further submits that the documents were not sent for comparison and in the absence thereof, the benefit goes in favour of accused-petitioner. Learned counsel also submits that no witness has been examined by the prosecution to prove that the documents allegedly recovered from the petitioner are forged. The FIR was registered on the basis of secret information, whereas, no independent witness was joined. It is not a case, whereby, any independent witness has refused to join the police authority and even then also the statement of any of the member of the Village or Member Panchayat was not recorded at the time of recovery. The truck was handed over to MHC by arranging another driver but neither the name of any alleged driver was there nor that driver was examined by the prosecution. It is also the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that there are material improvements in the statements of prosecution witnesses. There was no corroboration to the statement of the complainant and no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged offence was there. At the end, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the only bread winner of his family and is facing trial for the last more than eight years. He also submits that the petitioner, while remaining on bail during trial, never misused the concession of bail. Learned counsel prays for taking a lenient view and submits that in case, the sentence of the petitioner is reduced to the period already undergone i.e more than 101/2 months, he will not contest the conviction.