Himachal Pradesh High Court
State Of H.P vs Chain Lal on 10 October, 2017
Author: Sureshwar Thakur
Bench: Sureshwar Thakur
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
SHIMLA
.
Cr. Appeal No.723 of 2008 and
Cr. Appeal No. 736 of 2008.
Decided on : 10/10/2017
Cr. Appeal NO. 723 of 2008
State of H.P. .....Appellant.
Versus
Chain Lal .....Respondent.
Cr. Appeal No. 736 of 2008
State of H.P. .....Appellant.
Versus
Pritam Singh .....Respondent.
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Sureshwar Thakur, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1. Yes.
For the Appellant: Mr. Vivek Singh Attri, Addl. A.G.
For the Respondent: Mr. Divya Raj Singh Thakur,
Advocate.
_______________________________________________________
1
Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP
...2...
.
Sureshwar Thakur, Judge (Oral)
Since, both these appeals arise from a common judgment rendered on 24.07.2008 upon Criminal Appeal No.16 of 2007 and upon Criminal Appeal No. 17 of 2007, hence, they are decided by a common judgment.
2. The prosecution story in brief is that a challan has been prepared by SHO, Police Station Sadar Chamba against five accused namely Chain Lal, Chander Gupta, Prittam Singh, Raj Kumar and Rajinder Kumar. The accused Rajinder Kumar died during the proceeding of this case and proceeding against him were dropped. Sub Registrar Chamba has moved an application to SHO Sadar, Chamba regarding fraudulent registration of sale deed. The Sub Registrar has submitted copy of the statements recorded by him regarding fraudulent registration of sale deed alongwith the opinion given by the District Attorney, Chamba and requested the police to register a case against the accused person. The Sub Registrar has obtained the opinion of District Attorney. The Sub Registrar ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...3...
after making an inquiry came to know that someone .
impersonate Punnu Ram and appeared before him. The case was investigated by SHO Jaram Singh who after completing all codal formalities and on conclusion of the investigation into the offences, allegedly committed by the accused, prepared the challan and filed it in the Court.
3. A charge stood put to the accused by the learned trial Court, for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
4. In order to prove its case, the prosecution examined 10 witnesses. On closure of prosecution evidence, the statements of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, were recorded wherein they pleaded innocence and claimed false implication. They did not choose to lead any defence evidence.
5. On an appraisal of evidence on record, the learned trial Court returned findings of acquittal upon them with respect to the charges framed against them under ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...4...
Sections 420, 120-B, 467, 468 & 471 IPC, whereas the .
learned trial Court returned findings of conviction vis-à-vis them for commission of offence(s) under Section 419 read with Section 120(B) IPC, whereafter the learned Sessions Judge, Shimla, returned findings of acquittal against co-
accused Pritam Singh and Chain Lal.
6. The learned Additional Advocate General has concertedly and vigorously contended qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Appellate Court standing not based on a proper appreciation, by it, of evidence on record, rather, theirs standing sequelled by gross mis-
appreciation, by it, of the material on record. Hence, he contends qua the findings of acquittal warranting reversal by this Court in the exercise of its appellate jurisdiction and theirs standing replaced by findings of conviction.
7. The learned counsel(s) appearing for the respondents also with equal considerable force and vigour contend qua the findings of acquittal recorded by the learned Sessions Court standing based on a mature and ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...5...
balanced appreciation, by it, of evidence, on record and .
theirs not necessitating interference, rather theirs meriting vindication.
8. This Court with the able assistance of the learned counsel on either side has with studied care and incision, evaluated the entire evidence on record.
9. The accused were charged for theirs committing offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code. The ascriptions' of the aforesaid penal misdemeanor(s) vis.a.vis each of the accused, were, generated by a document comprised in Ext.PW-4/B being, not, executed by its author Punnu Ram, rather the accused respectively interse conspiring, to ensure its registration by the Registering officer concerned besides preponderantly, of, co-accused Chain Lal, as unveiled by the report of the hand writing expert, report whereof is borne in Ext.PW-10/C, forging the signatures of one Punnu Ram upon Ext.PW-4/B. The learned trial Court had pronounced an order of acquittal in ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...6...
respect of all co-accused qua charges framed under .
Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code. However, the State of Himachal Pradesh, did not, assail the aforesaid order of acquittal pronounced by the learned trial Court, whereas, the aforesaid accused made a challenge upon their conviction by the learned trial Magistrate, for theirs committing an offence punishable under Section 419 read with Section 120 (B) IPC. Since the accused appeals' instituted before the learned First Appellate Court, succeeded, thereupon hence the State of Himachal Pradesh chose to institute the instant appeals before this Court. It is worthwhile to observe that with the prosecution making (a) ascriptions of penal misdemeanor vis-à-vis each of accused, for theirs committing offences constituted under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B also (b) with the accused being charged, with specificity, in respects thereof besides (c) with the aforesaid offences purportedly arising from the principal accused Chain Lal ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...7...
forging the signature(s) of one Punnu Ram (d) thereupon it .
was wholly unnecessary for the trial Court, to pronounce an order of conviction upon the accused in respect of commission of offences under Section 419 read with Section 120 IPC, importantly when in respect thereof no specific charge was put. It reiteratedly, was, unbefitting for the learned trial Court, to, convict them for an offence constituted under Sections 419 read with Section 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code, emphatically when in respect thereof no specific charge was framed. Moreover a charge for commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, would acquire success, only upon surfacing of provenly scribed forged documents, whereafter parting of properties/ valuables from the victim vis-à-vis the accused, hence evidently occurred. The learned trial Court, however, rendered an order of acquittal upon the accused qua the aforesaid charges, verdict whereof remaining unassailed by the State of H.P., by its, preferring an appeal therefrom ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...8...
before this Court, renders it to acquire conclusivity. Nowat .
for adjudging the legality of the pronouncement made by the learned appellate Court, wherein, it acquitted the accused for theirs committing offences punishable under Section 419 read with Section 120 B IPC, an allusion is imperative vis-a-vis the provisions borne in Section 416 IPC, provisions whereof define(s) the offence of personation, provisions whereof stand extracted hereinafter.
"416. Cheating by personation.--A person is said to "cheat by personation" if he cheats by pretending to be some other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for another, or representing that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is. Explanation.--The offence is committed whether the individual personated is a real or imaginary person. Illustration
(a) A cheats by pretending to be a certain rich banker of the same name. A cheats by personation.
(b) A cheats by pretending to be B, a person who is deceased. A cheats by personation."
upon a reading thereof alongwith illustration(s) appended thereunder it is visibly describable therefrom, (1) of the ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...9...
offence of personation arising or its being completed, only, .
upon the accused mis representing himself to be a person other than his real identity or his camouflaging or faking his real identity vis-à-vis the person impersonated imperatively, before whom he makes a false repersonation qua his identity whereafter, the person before whom the accused person, unveils his fake identity being induced to part with valuables properties vis-à-vis the impersonator.
r Since obviously, the statutory ingredients comprised besides embodied in Section 416 IPC, to, hence render an offence to fall within its domain, do not enjoin the surfacing of purportedly forged scribed documents nor obviously with Section 416 IPC embodying offences arising from forging of documents, whereas, (b) in the instant case the purported signatures of one Punnu Ram, are, alleged by the prosecution, to, while his holding criminal conspiracy with other co-accused, be hence, forged by principal accused Chain Lal, commission of offence whereof, is expressly borne in Sections 463, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (II) thereupon with ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...10...
evidently the verdict pronounced by the learned trial Court, .
whereby, it acquitted the accused for commission of offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 read with Section 120(B) IPC, for reasons aforestated hence attaining conclusivity. (iii) It was grossly inapt, for the learned trial Court to convict the accused for theirs committing offences punishable under Be r that to Section 419 read with Section 120 (B) IPC.
10. as it may, given the aforesaid interpretation(s) purveyed vis.a.vis the apposite penal statutory provisions borne in the IPC, would render workable each of the provisions also thereupon it would oust the possibility of conflicts arising inter se the provisions embodied in Section 416 vis- a-vis the ones borne in Section 463 IPC and other connected therewith provisions. Since upon the attractable penal provisions vis.a.vis the accused, they stood acquitted, order whereof has attained finality, thereupon reiteratedly any purported charge framed under Section 419 read with Section 120(B) IPC was neither frameable vis-à-vis the accused nor concomitantly, it was befitting for the ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...11...
learned trial Magistrate to convict the accused in respect .
thereof, especially when the learned Magistrate proceeded to acquit the accused for charges framed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B, charges whereof alone enjoined theirs being framed vis-à-vis the accused.
11. The effect of the aforesaid discussion, is, of with abviously the State of H.P., not, assailing the order of acquittal pronounced by the learned trial Magistrate, with, respect to charges framed under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC read with Section 120-B, whereas, ascriptions' of dominant penal misdemeanor(s) vis-à-vis the accused, falling, within the domain of the aforesaid apt penal statutory provisions, thereupon the pronouncement made by the learned Appellate Court, whereby it acquitted the accused for offences punishable under Section 419 IPC, read with Section 120 IPC, provisions whereof were (i) neither workable vis-à-vis the penal dominant misdemeanor(s) imputed to the accused, nor
(ii) was any purported specific charge in respect thereto hence frameable against the accused, thereupon there is no merit in ::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP ...12...
both the appeals and they stand dismissed. The judgement of .
the learned Sessions Court is maintained and affirmed. Record of the learned trial Court be sent back forthwith.
10th October, 2017 ( Sureshwar Thakur )
™ Judge.
r to
::: Downloaded on - 14/11/2017 17:59:17 :::HCHP