Delhi District Court
State vs . Hemant Sahni on 19 October, 2016
IN THE COURT OF SH. KISHOR KUMAR, MM-03, SOUTH
WEST DISTRICT, ROOM NO.211, DWARKA COURTS,
DELHI.
FIR No. : 90/09
U/s : 420/468/471/506/34 IPC
P.S. : Bindapur
State Vs. Hemant Sahni
JUDGMENT:
a) Sl. No. of the Case : 35/6
b) Name & address of the : Sh. M.A. Chishti
complainant. S/o Sh. K.H. Chishti
R/o B-75, Jeewan Park, Uttam
Nagar, New Delhi.
c) Name & address of : Hemant Sahni
accused S/o Sh. Ved Parkash
R/o H.No. 107, Rashmi Apptts.,
Harsh Vihar, Pitam Pura, Delhi.
d) Date of Commission of : On or before June, 2008 offence
e) Offence complained off : U/s 420/468/471/506/34 IPC
f) Plea of the accused : Pleaded not guilty.
g) Final Order : Acquitted
h) Date of such order : 19.10.2016
Date of Institution : 20.10.2010
Final arguments heard on : 04.10.2016
Judgment Pronounced on : 19.10.2016
FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.1/25
BRIEF STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DECISION: -
1. Briefly stated, case of the prosecution is that on or before the month of June 2008, accused Hemant Sahni along with accused Vandna Sahni(since absconding) cheated complainant M.A. Chisti by dishonestly inducing him to deliver Rs.1.45 lacs on 17.07.08, Rs.50,000/- on 22.07.08 and Rs.1.45 lacs on 19.08.08 by promising him for providing employment to the son of the complainant namely Anjum Chisti with Jet Airways. Further, both the accused persons forged certain documents i.e. receipt for Rs.50,000/- on forged letter head of Jet Airways intending that it shall be used for the purpose of cheating and used the same as genuine. Complainant made complaint to the police on the basis of which present case FIR was registered and investigation was carried out.
2. After investigation, challan for offences punishable U/s 420/468/471/506/34 IPC was filed. Compliance of Section 207 Cr.P.C was done.
FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.2/25
3. Charge for committing the offence punishable Under section 420/468/471/34 IPC was framed against the accused, to which he had pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In support of its case, prosecution examined as many as seven witnesses.
5. PW1 SI Domnica Purti is the Duty Officer who recorded the present FIR Ex. PW1/A and also made endorsement Ex. PW1/B.
6. PW2 M.A. Chishti is the complainant. He deposed that he knew Smt. Vandna Sahni for a long period prior to year 2008. In year 2008, Smt. Vandna Sahni introduced him to Hemant Sahni, her husband. Whenever he met them they used to boast about their high links and also being very influential person. They also used to tell that FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.3/25 they are having good links in air line industry. Smt. Vandna Sahni was also working in Combata Company. It might be a company related to air line industry. PW2 got influenced by the said talking of the accused persons. His son is a graduate and has also done a course in travel and tourism and also a course of IATA. In June 2008, he told them for getting a post in jet airways for his son on which they told him that they can try and for Rs. 4.50 lacs they can get a job for his son as a cabin crew in jet airways.
They told him to give the money in two installments. PW2 told them he has some doubts that even after making payment whether a job would be given or not. PW2 requested them to arrange meeting with some officer of jet airways on which they told that by doing it the arrangement can be jeopardize. PW2 further deposed that in order to satisfy himself, he demanded cheque of the same denomination. They also told him that Rs. 50,000 was to be deposited as a security in jet air ways and the FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.4/25 same would be returned after 3 years of the job and a receipt of the deposit would be also issued to him. Because of these assurances he got trapped in their conspiracy and agreed for getting a job for his son in jet airways through them. He further deposed that on 22.07.2008, again said on 17.07.2008, he had given cheque of Rs.1.25 lacs and Rs. 20,000 in cash to Smt. Vandna Sahni in the presence of Hemant Sahni and in lieu of which cheque of Rs. 1.45 lacs was given to him by Smt. Vandna Sahni. On 22.07.2008, Rs. 50,000 was given by PW2 to Hemant Sahni and then they told him that an e- mail of receipt would come to him. Thereafter one e-mail was received by his son from jet airways which was sent from the account of Smt. Vandna Sahni. The said receipt was issued by jet airways officer Abhinav Sharma, Manager HR. On 19.08.2008, PW2 had given rest payment of Rs. 1.45 lacs to Hemant Sahni and Smt. Vandna Sahni. They also issued one cheque in lieu of the FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.5/25 payment signed by Smt. Vandna Sahni. Besides this PW2 had also given 18 photographs of his son, Bio data of his son and one blank paper which was signed by his son at his office B-75 Jeevan Park Uttam Nagar on the same day the payment was made. Thereafter they told him to wait for a good news. After two months' wait Smt. Vandna Sahni told him that the joining letter would come soon. After 15 days, when PW2 received no information, he went to their house where both of them met him and had a conversation with them then PW2 felt that a cheating has happened with him. Thereafter PW2 directly went to the office of jet-airways where he showed the receipt, on which they told that there is no person as Abhinav Sharma in their office and the said receipt is also a fake one as the same is not in their standard format. Thereafter PW2 called Smt. Vandna Sahni on which she threatened him that she will implicate him in a rape case as she is having high links with police officer. She also told him that she FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.6/25 will ruin their life and the whole life of both father and son would run in jail. She also threatened that she is having links with bad elements and get him killed. Thereafter PW2 went to the bank of accused on which the manager told him that there is no money in their account. Thereafter PW2 filed a complaint in PS Ex. PW2/A. The cheque was seized by police vide Ex. PW2/B. The original cheques are Ex. PW2/C and Ex PW2/D. Accused Hemant Sahni was arrested and his personal search was conducted vide Ex.PW2/E and Ex. PW2/F.
7. PW3 S. Venkatesh informed the police vide letter dated 01.04.2009 Ex. PW3/A that the letter head of Jet Airways Mark B is fake one. He further deposed that no receipt of Rs.50,000/- was issued by Jet Airways on 21.07.2008 on such letter head. He had also given the original letter heads Ex. PW3/B(Colly) to the police. FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.7/25
8. PW4 HC Naresh Kumar remained with IO during investigation. In his presence IO arrested accused vide memo Ex. PW2/E and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex. PW2/F.
9. PW5 Retd. SI Shri Kishan is the IO of this case. He met the complainant M.A. Chishti who has handed over him two cheques of SBI issued by Vandna Sahni, the same were seized vide Ex. PW2/B. The original cheques are Ex. PW2/C and PW2/D. The complainant also handed over him the receipt of Jet Airways Mark D. Thereafter, he went to Jet Airways Office and issued a notice to the Manager inquiring the authenticity of the receipt of Jet Airways vide Ex. PW5/A, who had replied on this notice that the said receipt is fake one. The said reply is Ex. PW3/A. Thereafter on 29.04.2009 PW5 had gone to the house of accused Hemant Sahni along with M.A. Chishti and HC Naresh and arrested the accused vide Ex. PW2/E and FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.8/25 personal search memo is Ex. PW2/F. The disclosure of accused was recorded vide Ex. PW5/B and PW5/C. During investigation PW5 also went to the SBI where the account of Vandna Sahni is maintained and inquired about the balance of the account in respect of which the cheques were issued on which the bank had replied that there was zero balance in the said account.
10. PW6 M.S. Rawat deposed that the A/c No. SB 10721271252 for which cheques Ex. PW2/C and Ex. PW2/D were issued, is in the name of Vandna Sahni.
11. PW7 Retd. SI Udai Singh moved an application Ex. PW7/A before Chief Manager, SBI and also recorded statement U/s 161 Cr. P.C of bank manager M.S. Rawat.
12. After completion of prosecution evidence, all the incriminating evidence was put to accused U/s 313 Cr.P.C FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.9/25 and his explanation was recorded. He denied all the incriminating evidence against him. He further stated that he was married on 21.11.1992 and a male child was born out of the said wedlock on 09.04.1999. His relations with his wife became strained in 2006-2007 as she had been in foreign countries at different intervals and she came in contact with certain persons who abused, misused and exploited her for their personal gains and that his wife in spite of his advice continued in contact with those persons including the complainant Mr. Chisti and on account of her relation with them, his married life was ruined. His wife stopped living with him in 2007 and since then she hardly visited their house occasionally and either stayed with her parents or abroad or having some separate accommodation. On 29.04.2009, some police officers came at the aforesaid house where his father late Sh. V. P. Sahni (Gazz. Officer), his brother Major Sandeep Sahni, his mother (Vice Principal) Govt. School were FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.10/25 present and informed them that he was required for the purpose of investigation in a case allegedly instituted by complainant Mr. M. A. Chisti. He with his father was taken to PS Bindapur and they were shocked to know that he has also been falsely implicated in this case and in spite of their request he was arrested. Accused further stated that he never met M. A. Chisti at any time except at the time of his arrest. The alleged cheques Ex. PW2/C and PW2/D seems to have been fraudulently procured by M.A. Chishti as his wife was playing in the hands of a Cacos of Chishti and his other associates.
13. I have heard Ld. APP for the State, Ld Counsel for the accused and have carefully gone through the record.
14. The present case was registered on the complaint of complainant PW-2 M.A. Chishti. When he was examined in the court as PW-1, he tried to adhere to his complaint, but FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.11/25 with certain material improvements.
15. He has been cross examined by Ld. Counsel for the accused Hemant Sahni at great length.
16. PW2/complainant M. A. Chishti in his cross examination deposed that he did not remember if, he had shown the payment of Rs. 1,25,000/- by way of cheque, Rs. 50,000/- cash and Rs. 1,45,000/- by cheque in his ITR. In 2007-08, son of complainant Anjum was not having any job. He further deposed that he had not presented any of his family members as witness to the incident before IO SI Kishan Lal. The form which was signed by son of the complainant and given to Smt. Vandna Sahni and Hemant Sahni was blank. PW-2 or his son Anjum never signed any blank paper or form for any purpose except in the present case. Neither PW-2 nor his son gave any specimen handwriting to the police during investigation. PW-2 had FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.12/25 not presented the cheques given by Smt. Vandna Sahni to the bank at any time. He has volunteered stated that when he came to know that he has been cheated, he went to the bank with cheques where he came to know that there is no money in the account on which cheques were drawn. He did not remember the date when Smt. Vandna Sahni gave him the cheques. She used to give the undated cheques to PW-2 whenever he made any payment to her. The cheques were having only particulars regarding amount and rest was blank.
17. PW-2 further deposed in his cross examination dated 18.11.2014, that at the time when cheques were given to him, there was no other person present. He did not maintain account books. He was also not maintaining any personal diary which could reflect the entries of transactions made with the accused. According to PW-2 he had not met Smt. Vandna Sahni prior to June, 2007 at FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.13/25 any time. She had come to show her horoscope as PW-2 was working as Astrologer also. He had met Smt. Vandna Sahni for about 8-10 times prior to July-August, 2008. There was no transaction between him and Smt. Vandna Sahni except present transaction. Initially, for 2-3 times Smt. Vandna Sahni came for her horoscope purpose and her further visits were to show her impression on her links and capabilities of providing services.
18. A question had been put to PW-2 by Ld. Counsel for present accused that prior to lodging the complaint Ex. PW2/A since June, 2007, PW-2 and his associates have been exploiting and abusing Smt. Vandna Sahni for pleasure. To this question PW-2 answered 'it is wrong'. He also denied that because of misconduct of PW-2 with Smt. Vandna Sahni, the domestic and family life of accused ruined and she left the matrimonial home without knowledge of Hemant Sahni.
FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.14/25
19. In cross examination of PW-2 dated 01.06.2015, he admitted that in his complaint Ex. PW2/A presence of accused Hemant Sahni has not been mentioned on 17.07.2008 transaction. It is also correct that presence of Smt. Vandna Sahni at the time of transaction dated 22.07.2008, is not mentioned in complaint Ex. PW2/A. It is also correct that PW-2 did not mention "in the year 2008"
in his complaint Ex. PW2/A from point A to A. It is correct that in complaint Ex. PW2/A the fact that "Smt. Vandna Sahni was also working in Combata Company" was not mentioned. It is also correct that in Ex. PW2/A the fact "they also told me to give the money in two installments"
is not mentioned. It is also correct that in Ex. PW2/A the fact "Hemant Sahni counted the cash" is not mentioned. It is also correct that in Ex. PW2/A the fact "e-mail from the account of Smt. Vandna Sahni" is not mentioned. It is also correct that in Ex. PW2/A the fact that "the said receipt is FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.15/25 fake one as the same is not in their standard format" is not mentioned. It is also correct that in Ex. PW2/A the fact that "I went to their house where both of them met me and had a conversation with them" is not mentioned.
20. PW-2 had not separately filed any complaint in respect of threat given by Smt. Vandna Sahni to PW-2 regarding false implication in rape case or to ruin his life.
21. After careful and minute scrutiny of deposition of PW- 2/complainant, it is found that the complainant in his examination in chief improved a lot from his initial complaint Ex. PW2/A. The improvement is apparently to rope in the present accused Hemant Sahni when PW-2 in his examination in chief has deposed that Rs. 50,000/- was given in the presence of present accused and he had counted the same, whereas this fact did not find mention in the complaint Ex. PW2/A. The entire testimony of PW- FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.16/25 2/complainant point out the direct involvement of Proclaimed Offender Smt. Vandna Sahni that she had been dealing with the complainant. No active role of present accused Hemant Sahni has been stated by the complainant or that accused Hemant Sahni had been acting by and on the instructions of accused Smt. Vandna Sahni. As per testimony of PW-2 itself, he had given the cheques of Rs. 1,25,000/- and Rs. 1,45,000/- to Smt. Vandna Sahni only.
22. It is very much pertinent to mention herein as to whether the said cheques issued by the complainant to Smt. Vandna Sahni have been got encashed by the present accused Hemant Sahni. The concerned bank officials from the bank of the complainant has not been examined to prove factum of honouring / credit of the amount of cheques issued by complainant in the account of the present accused Hemant Sahni. The Investigating FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.17/25 Officer also did not carry investigation whether any amount has been credited to the account of accused Hemant Sahni. Apart from this, it is also the case that complainant has not produced any documentary proof of making the payment of Rs. 50,000/- to present accused Hemant Sahni.
23. It is also the case of the prosecution that accused Vandna Sahni had emailed the son of the complainant Anjum with regard to offer of job. Same is mark-A on record. But since the said e-mail mark-A has not been proved as per law and further that the text (attachment), not disclosed to the court and proved as per law, the said e-mail mark-A stands not proved and cannot be seen for any purpose. At least it was wise on the part of the prosecution to examine the son of the complainant Anjum to prove the e-mail. The IO of the case also did not record the statement of Anjum/son of the complainant that at the FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.18/25 relevant point of time he was unemployed and that his father had been running pillar to post for a job for Anjum. No educational testimonials were procured by the IO from Anjum to strengthen the claim of the complainant that his son was graduate and had done some tourism course.
24. PW-3 S. Venkatesh, has categorically deposed in the court that no receipt of Rs. 50,000/- was issued by Jet Airways on 21.07.2008 on the letter head of Jet Airways. This witness has also been cross examined by Ld. Counsel for present accused and there he deposed that he cannot rule out the possibility that any other employee of HR department might have issued the letter mark-B. The police never investigated / interrogated any person of their office except PW-3.
25. I have seen the letter head mark-B and have also compared the same with letter heads given by PW-3 to FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.19/25 the IO of the case mark-B. In the opinion of the court Mark-B is fake one since it does not bear any water mark as borne by the letter heads Ex. PW3/B (colly). It is also note worthy that in the receipt mark-B, the telephone numbers of Jet Airline mentioned are different than the telephone numbers of Jet Airline mentioned in Ex. PW3/B (colly) (supplied to the IO by PW-3 during investigation). Be that as it may, neither the complainant nor the police for that matter or the prosecution after filing of the charge sheet in the court, been able to connect the present accused to be the maker of the receipt mark-B. The same may be fake one but the burden of the same, as its creator, cannot be foisted upon the accused.
26. PW-5 is initial IO of the case. He has been cross examined by Ld. Counsel for accused. He deposed that he did not record any statement of son of the complainant or his wife. He also did not inquire about the educational FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.20/25 qualifications of son of the complainant nor he demanded or produced before him the original or copies of the educational certificates of his son.
27. It is correct that he did not call or obtain any bank account number of the complainant nor the complainant gave any account number of his bank. He further admitted that when he reached at the house of the accused, he found that Smt. Vandna Sahni was not living with him. It is correct that accused and his father told him that Smt. Vandna Sahni was not living with accused or in their house since long because of domestic problems between the husband and wife.
28. The accused in his explanation given in his statement recorded u/s 313 Cr.PC has narrated the similar story that he is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He was married on 21.11.1992 and a male FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.21/25 child was born out of their wed lock on 09.04.1999. His relations with his wife became strained in 2006-07 as she had been in foreign countries at different intervals and came in contact with certain persons who abused, misused and exploited her for their personal gains and that his wife inspite of his advice continued in contact with those persons including the complainant Mr. Chishti and on account of her relation with them, his married life ruined. His wife stopped living with him in 2007 and since then she hardly visited their house occasionally and she either stayed with her parents or abroad or had some separate accommodation. On 29.04.2009, some police officers came at the aforesaid house where his father late Sh. V. P. Sahni (Gazz. Officer), his brother Major Sandeep Sahni, his mother (Vice Principal) Govt. School, were present and informed them that he was required for the purpose of investigation in a case allegedly instituted by complainant Mr. M.A. Chishti. He with his father was FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.22/25 taken to PS Bindapur and they were shocked to know that he has also been falsely implicated in this case and inspite of their request he was arrested. He never met M. A. Chishti at any time till his arrest, who was present at the PS.
29. I have gone through the testimony of PW-5 SI Shri Kishan and the explanation given by accused in his statement u/s 313 Cr.PC, and find the same consistent and straight. Since beginning the accused had taken the same stand that his wife have had certain issues because of which she had not been living with him. There is a tinge of truthfulness in the explanation given by the accused. Not only this, it is found that same kind of explanation, present accused had extended at the time of arguments on his bail application which was allowed by Ld. Sessions Court on dated 15.05.2009. There also, the submissions of the accused was that co-accused Smt. Vandna Sahni FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.23/25 was working with Combata Aviation (Passenger and Cargo Handling Agents), IGI Airport since 1998 in the night shifts and had developed bad company and in the past taken money from several persons, even by pledging the property of the accused and was reprimanded several times by the accused and his family. Several of her accounts were settled by the accused in the capacity of husband as he was getting threats of such people in the past. Smt. Vandna Sahni has been living separately since long. The only son of the accused is living with him and whereabouts of Smt. Vandna Sahni are not known to the applicant for last several months.
30. There is no direct evidence against the accused that he in any manner induced the complainant. The oral testimony of complainant is not believable for want of any corroborative document.
FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.24/25
31. In view of the above discussion, it is held that prosecution has not been successful to bring home the guilt of present accused Hemant Sahni, if he had cheated the complainant or forged document Mark-B and used it as genuine in connivance and in furtherance with co- accused Vandna Sahni. Resultantly, accused Hemant Sahni is acquitted of the charged offences.
32. File be consigned to record room to be revived as and when the Proclaimed Offender Vandna Sahni is apprehended and produced before the court and tried as per law. The observations arrived at herein, while passing this judgment qua accused Hemant Sahni, shall not come in the way of prosecution of the Proclaimed Offender Vandna Sahni.
Dictated & Announced in Open Court (Kishor Kumar) nd On the 19 day of October, 2016 MM-03/South-West/Delhi 19.10.2016 FIR No: 90/09 state v. hemant sahni Page No.25/25