JAGANNATH Vs. RAM LAL SHARMA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been filed against judgement dated 30.11.2011 in Criminal Appeal No. 21 of 2011 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track, Kullu affirming order dated 5.2.2011 passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kullu in Cr.MA No. 173-IV of 2009.

(2.) The facts in brief are that petitioner had filed an application under section 340 Crimial P.C. for prosecution of respondent for offence, punishable under sections 191, 193 Penal Code. It has been alleged that respondent was the Secretary of Sanatan Dharam Sabha Kullu. The Sanatan Dharam Sabha had filed a suit for declaration, which was dismissed by the learned Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kullu on 30.6.2008. The appeal was pending in the court of District Judge, Kullu. The respondent appeared as witness of Sanatan Dharam Sabha on 12.10.2007 and denied the suggestion that resolution No. 2 was tampered with and interpolated that Jai Ram has been appointed as Sub Manager. Thereafter the respondent has asserted in his deposition that accused had communicated the dismissal of Jai Ram from the post of Sub Manager through a registered letter dated 25.3.1961. He denied the suggestion that resolution Ex. PW 3/A was tampered and inserted the words that "Jai Ram was appointed as Dy. Manager".

(3.) The respondent knew that Jai Ram had never been appointed as Dy. Manager of Sabha, the respondent further falsely deposed that one 21/2 storeyed slate roofed building on the disputed land was constructed after the filing of civil suit by Sabha. He denied the existence of second house on the suit land knowing fully well that there were two houses on the suit land at the time when respondent made statement under oath before the Civil Judge (Senior Division), Kullu. The respondent denied the possession of 'Dak register', cash book with intention to defeat the claim of petitioner. The respondent has no record of letter dated 30.7.1964 bearing letter No. 659/64/PTK mark-C in the civil suit, which was sent by the petitioner to Sabha. The respondent knowingly gave false statement.