ZILE SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision petition has been filed against the order dated 8.5.2006 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court), Bhiwani, whereby the application of the petitioner for leading additional evidence has been declined.

(2.) THE petitioner was working as a Conductor with the Haryana Roadways, Bhiwani. On 29.8.1991 he was on duty in the bus and carrying passengers from Bhiwani to Dadri/Alwar. On the way the bus was checked at village Haluwas by the Inspectors of the Roadways Department. The petitioner, it was found, had given a ticket bearing No. 54601 of Rs. 1.50 to a passenger. The face value of which was changed from Rs. 1.50 to Rs. 4.50. From the possession of the petitioner two bundles of tickets numbering from 54601 to 54700 and 54701 to 54800 were recovered. On account of the change of the face value of the ticket the petitioner was tried and convicted by the learned trial Court vide order dated 30.1.2002. Against the said order, the petitioner has filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, which is pending before the learned Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Bhiwani. Along with the appeal an application under Section 391 Cr.P.C. was filed for grant of permission to lead additional evidence i.e. way bill, photocopy of which has been attached as Annexure P-1, dated 29.8.1991 to the present petition. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track Court) Bhiwani, vide his impugned order dated 8.5.2006 has declined the application which is assailed by the petitioner.

(3.) IN response learned counsel for the State has submitted that the petition has been filed only to delay the matter. The case is of the year 1992 and in case the petitioner wanted to produce the way bill that he now wants to produce he could have done so before the trial Court in his defence. In any case, it is submitted that the way bill (Annexure P-2) was taken in possession from the petitioner and in lieu of that the way bill (Annexure P-1) was given to him. In the way bill (Annexure P-1), it has been mentioned by the checker that the tickets 54601 to 54700 and 54701 to 54800 were with them. It is submitted that the petitioner was having in his possession both the way bills (Annexure P-1 and Annexure P-2). However, the way bill Annexure P-2 was taken in possession and the receipt of taking the tickets was recorded on the said way bill (Annexure P-1). Thereafter, on the bill (Annexure P-2) that was taken in possession, an endorsement was made that the petitioner had committed forgery. Therefore, it is submitted that the petitioner cannot derive any advantage of the way bill (Annexure P-1) which was left with him and after the journey was deposited by him with the Roadways Authorities.