GIAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS order will dispose of an application under Section 389, Cr. P. C. for suspension of judgment of conviction dated december 11, 2003 of Special Judge, faridabad in case FIR No. 249, dated May 1, 2002 under Sections 384, 342, 120-B, ipc and Section 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, (sic) Police Station Hodal, district Faridabad.

(2.) THE appellant has been convicted by trie trial Court i. e. Special Judge, Faridabad, vide judgment dated December 11, 2003. Trie statutory first appeal against the conviction order is pending in this Court as admitted. The sentence of imprisonment stands already suspended by granting him the concession of bail vide order dated January 6, 2004.

(3.) THE appellant-applicant referring to the merits of the cases submits that the appellant has been acquitted under Sections 342 and 120-B, IPC raising a doubt regarding the stiltedly of prosecution version, the complainant Prabhu Dayal, P. W. 6 and Dr. Jagdish P. W. 7 has not supported the prosecution case regarding the appellant and his co-accused Mukhtiar Singh resulting in acquittal of appellant under Sections 342 and 120-B, IPC. The conviction of the appellant and his co-accused Mukhtiar Singh that they extorted money is not maintainable. The complaint Ex. PA has been presumed to be proved by the trial Court on the basis of the testimony of the investigating officer p. W. 10 and SDM, Hodal, P. W. 9. Once P. W. 6 and P. W. 7 have turned hostile, the credibility of testimony of investigating officer stands impeached. The conviction of appellant under section 13 (i) (d) (ii) and Section 13 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act for misconduct is not sustainable. It is averred by the appellant that the Deputy Commissioner, Faridabad, has issued a show cause notice dated February 4, 2008 which was delivered at the residence of the appellant on February 8, 2008 for imposing penalty of dismissal from service.