NEK RAM Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS criminal revision is directed against the Judgment and order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jammu, dated: 20.12.1979 whereby the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate Jammu on 7.7.1975, has been confirmed, for the learned Addl. Sessions Judge i.e. the appellate court, found that there was cogent and satisfactory evidence led by the prosecution which was mostly documentary in nature and, therefore, he upheld the order of conviction and sentence recorded by the trial court against the accused.

(2.) PETITIONERS Nek Ram, Roop Lal, Ajit Singh and Kartar Singh, "hereinafter called as the accused", were held guilty of criminal conspiracy, impersonation, cheating and forgery and they were thus sentenced for various offences and the sentences awarded to them on various counts did not in any case exceed two years and all the sentences were to be run by them concurrently.

(3.) THE order of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court and upheld by the appellate court, has been assailed by the accused in this revision petition on the ground that the complaint made against them was false and concocted and the same was launched by the complainant out of sheer enimity. He conspired with the investigating agency and got the photographs of Piara Singh replaced with those of accused Nek Ram, the Investigating Officer deliberately withheld the original file No. JKMIR/U/787 consisting of 274 pages and that file contained all the documents in original submitted to the Assistant Settlement Officer by Piara Singh. According to the accused the impugned judgment being in utter disregard of the facts and the law on the record of the file, is liable to be quashed for it has, not been justified as to how a case of criminal conspiracy was mahout, against the accused. It is contended that the trial court and the appellate court have manifestly failed to appreciate in the judicial manner the evidence of the complainant Piara Singh, who has categorically admitted that he had filed the claim petition and received the payment of Rs.3500/ -. On the face of his statement there was no scope for the trial court to fix the criminal liability, if any, upon the accused that they have committed any offence for which they have been convicted and sentenced. It stands fully proved that the photograph of accused Nek Ram was planted by the prosecution itself to prove him as imposter and both the courts below have failed to weigh the evidence in this regard judicially and the judgment in this behalf is full of lacunae.