PARKASH SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision petition has been preferred by Parkash Singh and Ram Piara assailing the judgments of conviction and order of sentence dated 2502.2006 passed by the learned trial Court and affirmed by the learned Appellate Court vide judgment dtd. 28/1/2008, whereby both the petitioners were held guilty under Ss. 419, 420, 468 and 471 read with Sec. 120-B of the IPC and sentenced to undergo imprisonment as follows: <IMG>JUDGEMENT_191_LAWS(P&H)9_2025_1.jpg</IMG>

(2.) All the sentences were ordered to be run concurrently.

(3.) Learned Amicus Curiae appearing for the petitioners has contended that both the Courts below erred in convicting the petitioners as the prosecution failed to establish its case beyond reasonable doubt. It was urged that the petitioners were merely attesting witnesses to the impugned sale deed and had no role in the preparation or execution of the document. Learned counsel further submitted that the principal accused, Gurmeet Singh, who had impersonated the true owner and was the direct beneficiary of the forged transaction, has since expired. In these circumstances, the conviction of the petitioners under Sec. 120B of the IPC is argued to be unsustainable. It has also been pointed out that the learned Appellate Court had already acquitted the petitioners of the charges under Ss. 468 and 471 of the IPC and in the absence of conviction of the principal accused under Sec. 420 of the IPC, the provisions of Sec. 120B of the IPC could not be invoked against them.