STATE OF H.P. Vs. VIDYA DEVI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present appeal is directed against the judgment dtd. 26/12/2011 passed by learned Special Judge, Kullu (learned Trial Court), vide which the respondents (accused before the learned Trial Court) were acquitted of the charges framed against them. (Parties shall be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)

(2.) Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 420, 467, 468 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) and Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It was asserted that Sunder Lal Sharma married Vidya Devi in 1977. Vidya Devi got half share to the extent of 0-7-0 bigha in Khasra No. 2372, measuring 0-14-0 bigha situated in Mauja Lagsari District Kullu. She executed a gift deed no. 785 in favour of the Ayurvedic Department on 24/10/1980 for the construction of Ayurvedic Bhawan. She delivered the possession to the Ayurvedic Department. She filed an application before Deputy Commissioner, Kullu seeking Nautor because she was left with no land after gifting her share to the Ayurvedic Department. She also encroached upon Khasra No. 2880 in Unprotected Forest (UPF) to the extent of 2-17-0 bigha. She filed an application in May 1990 to get the timber under Timber Distribution (TD) Rights. This application was verified by Patwari Gulbadan on 4/5/1990. Totu Ram recommended the grant of TD rights. DFO sanctioned the TD in favour of Vidya Devi. Vidya Devi filed a false application for getting the TD because she did not have any land in her name in Mohal Lagsari, and only a landowner was entitled to file the application for getting the TD. Gulbadan and Totu Ram also helped Vidya Devi by making false report. In this manner, they caused a loss to the State Government. The police registered the FIR (Ext. PW21/B) in the police station. Rajinder Kumar (PW30) conducted the initial investigation. He inspected the spot and prepared the site plan (Ext. PW30/A). He seized the case file, inquiry report, and other documents vide memo (Ext. PW2/A). He collected the TD Register and applications for a grant of TD (Ext. PW1/B and Ext. PW1/C) from the office of DFO vide memo (Ext. PW1/D). He collected the gift deed (Ext. PW3/A) from the Tehsil office vide memo (Ext. PW3/B). He seized the documents (Ext. PW4/A) from the office of Range Officer Kullu vide memo (Ext. PW4/B). He seized the jamabandies (Exts. PW6/A to Ext. PW6/E) vide memo (Ext. PW6/F). He seized the permit book (Ext. PW5/C) vide memo (Ext. PW7/A). He obtained the certified file of the mutation (Ext. PW30/B), certified copy of the sale deed (Ext. PW30/C), the documents of encroachment proceedings against Vidya Devi (Ext. PW30/D to Ext. PW30/G), photocopy of the application of the Vidya Devi (Ext. PW30/H), and photocopy of the application of Totu Ram (Ext. PW30/J and Ext. PW30/K). He obtained the specimen signatures and handwriting of Gulbadan (Ext. PW30/L to Ext. PW30/P). Further investigation was conducted by Nand Kishore (PW20). He produced Gulbadan, Totu Ram and Sunder Lal before Naib Tehsildar-cum-Executive Magistrate to obtain their specimen signatures. Specimen signatures of Sunder Lal (Ext. PW10/A1 to Ext. PW10/A10), Totu Ram (Ext. PW10/A11 to Ext. PW10/A20) and Gulbadan (Ext. PW10/A21 to Ext. PW10/A30) were taken. He seized the admitted handwriting of Totu Ram (Ext. PW20/B) vide memo (Ext. PW20/A). Balwant Singh (PW29) conducted the further investigation. He produced Vidya Devi before Executive Magistrate Kullu (PW28) to obtain her signatures. Her specimen signatures (Ext. PW28/A1 to Ext. PW28/A9) were taken. He seized the encroachment file (Ext. PW9/A1 to Ext. PW9/A42) and letters (Ext. PW9/B, Ext. PW9/D and Ext. PW9/E) vide memo (Ext. PW9/C). He obtained the timber passing register (Ext. PW5/A) vide memo (Ext. PW5/B). He seized the jamabandi of Khata No. 294 (Ext. PW6/D). The specimen and disputed signatures were sent to FSL Junga for comparison. The result of the analysis (Ext. PW31/A) was issued in which it was mentioned that the writing on the register (Q1), the admitted handwriting (A1 to A3) and specimen handwriting (S1 to S9) were written by the same person. Similarly, the writing on the register (Q2 to Q4) admitted handwriting (A4 to A9) and specimen handwriting (S10 to S29) were written by the same person. The writing on the register (Q5) specimen writing (S40 to S49) and admitted writing (A13 to A17) were written by the same person. Disputed signatures (Q6), specimen writing (S30 and 39) and admitted writing (A10 to A12) were written by the same person. The statements of the witnesses were recorded as per their version, and after the completion of the investigation, the challan was prepared and presented before the learned Trial Court.

(3.) Learned Trial Court charged accused-Vidya Devi with the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 420, 467, and 468 read with Sec. 120B of IPC and accused Totu Ram, Gulbadan and Sunder Lal with the commission of offences punishable under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 120B of IPC and Sec. 13(2) read with Sec. 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. The accused pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.