KULBINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF H.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE two appeals are being disposed of by a common judgment, because in both of them, the same judgment, which is dated 28.10.2003, of learned Special Judge, whereby the Appellants have been convicted of offences, under Sections 467, 468, 471, 420 read with Section 120B and Section 13(2) of the prevention of Corruption of Act and awarded varying sentences for the said offences, has been challenged.

(2.) POLICE filed a case against three Appellants, in both the appeals, and one Sukh Dev Raj, alleging that Appellant Kulbinder Singh, who had earlier been serving as Constable in Police Department and was relieved on acceptance of his resignation, in connivance with Appellant B.D. Verma, who was working as Superintendent Grade -II in the Office of Director General of Police (DGP), Appellant Kartar Singh, who was working as Gunman with the DGP and one Sukh Dev Raj also a Gunman, with an Officer on DGP 'sestablishment, managed to forge letter Ext. PW3/E. to get reemployment himself.

(3.) AFTER rejection of his representation by the Secretary (Home), vide communication Ext. PW1/B, Appellant Kulbinder Singh allegedly approached Appellant B.D. Verma, who was then working as Superintendent Grade -II in the office of DGP. He approached him through Constables Appellant Kartar Singh and Appellant Sukh Dev Raj, who were working as Gunmen with the DGP. All the four conspired to forge letter in the name of Under Secretary (Home) addressed to DGP. Such a letter was then forged The same is Ext. PW3/E and it is dated 24.11.1994. On the basis of this forged letter, in which there is a direction to DGP to reemploy Appellant Kulbinder Singh, matter was processed in the office of DGP by Appellant B.D. Verma and the aforesaid letter Ext. PW3/E was endorsed to Commandant, 1st Battalion, Junga, from whose establishment Appellant Kulbinder Singh had been relieved. Acting on that endorsement, the said Commandant reemployed Appellant Kulbinder Singh.