Delhi District Court
State vs . Tarsem Lal Verma on 30 January, 2019
IN THE COURT OF MS.SHEFALI BARNALA TANDON:
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE-06, CENTRAL DISTRICT, TIS HAZARI
COURTS: DELHI
FIR No.82/1997
State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma
U/s. 420/468/471 IPC
PS Civil Lines
JUDGMENT
1. CIS number of the case : 291583-2016
2. CNR number of the case : DLCT02-000070-1999
3. The date of commission of : 07.05.1996
offence
4. The name of the complainant : Sh. Naresh Kumar, Director of
Information & Publicity, Govt. of
NCT Delhi.
5. The name and address of : Tarsem Lal Verma
accused S/o Late Sh. Madan Lal Verma
R/o 7A, Minto Road, New
Delhi.
Presently residing at H.No.308,
Block-1, Motia Khan,
Paharganj, Delhi.
6. Offence under which charge : U/s 420/468/471 IPC
has been framed
7. The plea of accused : Pleaded not guilty.
8. Final Order : Convicted of charge
U/s 420/468/471 IPC
FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 1 of 14
PS Civil Lines
Date of Institution : 22.11.1999
Judgment reserved on : 15.01.2019
Judgment announced on : 30.01.2019
Brief Reasons For Such Decision:
1. Briefly stated, the facts of the case as unfolded from the charge-sheet are that on 07.05.1996, at unknown time, at Directorate of Information & Publicity, Government of NCT of Delhi, Block No.9, Old Secretariat Delhi, accused cheated the office of Directorate of Information & Publicity by dishonestly inducing them that he was an eligible candidate for the post of Assistant Information Officer (Non-Gazetted Class-III) published by the aforesaid Department by submitting forged documents regarding his experience i.e. (1) certificate regarding post held as Information Assistant with duration from 21.09.1980 to 20.05.1982 in department/ employee CEERI pilani (D.I.P.R), (2) Certificate regarding post held as Reporter in Veer Pratap from duration 01.06.1983 to 30.07.1986 in Pratap Publication Ltd., Partap Bhawan, Jalandhar City, (3) Certificate regarding post held as Sub-Editor from duration 10.08.1986 to 05.01.1992 in "Voice of the Weak" newspaper, Bapu Bhawan, Karol Bagh, New Delhi, (4) post held as correspondent from duration 07.01.1992 to 30.12.1995 in B.B. News, M-48, Malviya Nagar, New Delhi, (5) Liasion Officer from duration 01.1995 to 25.05.1996 in Rajiv Manan Production, L- 237A, Sahibabad, Ghaziabad, U.P. and (6) one Character Certificate, issued by one Mr. Virender Singh, Desk Officer, Ministry of Defence & on FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 2 of 14 PS Civil Lines the basis of the aforesaid documents, he was selected & appointed for the above said post.
However, on inquiry, it was surfaced that accused has used fake testimonials regarding his experience, hence, accused forged the aforesaid documents with intention to cheat the Complainant Department and fraudulently & dishonestly used the said documents as genuine. Accordingly, case was registered and charge-sheet was filed after thorough investigation and accused was charge-sheeted U/s 420/468/471 IPC.
2. The copies of charge-sheet as well as its annexures were supplied to the accused in compliance of Section 207 Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter called as Cr.P.C.) and charge for the offences U/s 420/468/471 IPC was framed against accused namely Tarsem Lal Verma by the Ld. Predecessor of the Court lastly vide order dated 17.09.2014, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.
3. The prosecution was thereafter given opportunity to prove the accusations against the accused, it examined 15 witnesses and closed its evidence. Thereafter, statement of accused namely Tarsem Lal Verma was examined u/s. 313 Cr.PC wherein all the incriminating evidence on record alongwith documents were put to him, which were generally denied by him, however, he stated that he was a whistle blower & refused to sign fake consumption certificates/ bills on verbal directions of the Director of FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 3 of 14 PS Civil Lines DIP & Head of the Department of DIP, NCT of Delhi & made complaint to the then CM (Late Sh. Sahib Singh Verma), to whom he also met personally & explained about malpractice, irregularity and corruption in the Department.
The accused led defence evidence and examined himself as DW-1 and Sh. Bhagwan Dass as DW-2.
Final arguments were heard at length. The entire case file has been carefully perused including the written arguments alongwith case laws filed by defefence.
4. The case of prosecution was proved by its witnesses as Sh. B.S. Yadav, the main witness was examined as PW-8, who deposed that in the year 1996, accused Tarsem Lal Verma was appointed as Assistant Information Officer in the Information & Publicity Department. At the time of joining the accused had submitted some documents like character certificate & experience certificate. He forwarded the said documents for verification in the concerned department(s) from where the said documents were issued and during verification, the said documents were found to be fake as the said documents were not issued by the Department(s). He informed his Department about the above said fact that the documents submitted by accused at the time of joining in their department were fake.
5. The Complainant/ then Director in Information & Publicity FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 4 of 14 PS Civil Lines Department, Govt. of NCT Delhi, examined as PW-5 Sh. Naresh Kumar deposed that on 04.11.1996, while working as a Director, a complaint was sent to the Delhi Police regarding taking action against accused Tarsem Lal Verma for furnishing the wrong records for the purpose of appointment as Assistant Information Officer in the Department. The complaint is proved as Ex.PW5/A. The complaint was forwarded to the Deputy Commissioner of Police through his above mentioned Office/ Department. Accused was correctly identified by him in the court.
6. Owner of Rajiv Menon Productions, having shop bearing No.265/15, Kernel Firm, Tigri, Phase-2, New Delhi mentioned in the experience/ salary certificate furnished by the accused at the time of applying for the employment has been examined as PW-1 Sh. Suresh Kumar, who deposed that he is the owner of the aforesaid shop since 1994-95 and no firm existed in the name & style of Rajiv Menon Production Firm at his above said shop ever. After seeing the letter No.Ref: PR/1/96, dated 07.02.1996, of RAJIV MENON, PRODUCTIONS, having address 265/15, Karnal Farm, Tigri Phase-II, New Delhi-110062, telephone number 6980211, issued by Vijay Kumar (Manager) proved as Mark-1A, he deposed that the said document was having address as well as telephone number of his office shop but the said RAJIV MENON PRODUCTIONS never exist in the said name & style at his shop. Further, there was no manager at his above said shop in the name of Vijay Kumar, hence, the document has been fraudulently prepared using his above said FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 5 of 14 PS Civil Lines address and telephone number.
7. The then Editor-in-Chief of B.B.News namely Sh. Bharat Bhushan Bhatia, examined as PW-6 denied preparation of any experience certificate No.3/95 dated 30.12.1995 of B.B. News in the name of accused. The said copy proved as marked as PW6/A2.
8. The then Under Secretary in Ministry of Welfare, Govt. of India namely Sh. Virendra Singh has been examined as PW-7, who deposed that in the year 1996, he received Letter No.F8(22)/96- DIP/E&H/19446 dated 27.09.1996 from B.S. Yadav, Administrative Officer, DIP for verification of the attestation signature of the Attestation Officer in the Character Certificate in the name of accused Tarsem Lal Verma, dated 27.05.1996. However, the said certificate did not bear his signatures and even his spelling on the said certificate was also wrong. He also could not say who put the seal underneath the said signature & name on Mark- PW7/A2. In reply to Mark-PW-7/A1, he stated that since 1990, he has been working as Under Secretary and he has not issued any Character Certificate in the name of accused. He neither knew nor met the accused. Copy of his reply dated 04.10.1996 proved as Mark-PW7/A. The said letter bears his correct name and seal. However, the copy of Character Certificate proved as Mark-PW7/A2 is a false certificate.
He further deposed that Assistant Section Officer of DIP produced the original of letters Marked as PW7/A1 and PW7/A3 and thus FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 6 of 14 PS Civil Lines the said documents proved as Ex.PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B respectively.
9. PW-9 Sh. Chander Mohan deposed that he was working as an Editor of Veer Pratap from 01.01.1994 upto 31.03.2017. He wrote a letter No.F.8(22)96-DIP/Estt/19442 dated 27.09.1996 to B.S. Yadav, Administrative Officer, Directorate of Information & Publicity, Govt. of NCT of Delhi, Block No.9, Old Secretariat, Delhi regarding the genuineness of the certificates submitted by accused marked as Mark-9A. No person by the name of Tarsem Lal Verma worked as a reporter at Chandigarh Bureau and the certificates, which he had furnished to the DAVP were fake.
10. The then Senior Admin Officer namely Sh. Vineet Kumar Sinha at JS Training & CAD, CA-II Hutment Ministry of Defence, DHQ Area, New Delhi examined as PW-2 deposed that on 19.08.1996 a query was received in writing by Office of Delhi Administration asking about certain details in respect of the accused, as he was earlier working in Ministry of Defence. The said query was responded vide letter No.A/36149/CAO/A-2(B) dated 19.08.1996, proved as Ex.PW2/A, which was signed by him. As per the said letter, he informed the office of Delhi Administration about certain antecedents of service of accused in Ministry of Defence. He had communicated that accused has been proceeded disciplinary and after due consideration of all facts, the competent authority had removed him from the service on 05 th May, 1993. With his letter, he had also enclosed the copies of following letters i.e. (1) notice FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 7 of 14 PS Civil Lines dated 5th May, 1993 with letter No.A/73311/88/R/CAO/P-2 & the same has been proved as Ex.PW2/B, (2) letter No.A/73311/88/R/CAO/P-2 dated 7 th July, 1993 proved as Ex.PW2/C and (30 order No.A/28218/CAO/Vig/Vol.II dated 24th Januay, 1994, proved as Ex.PW2/D. He further deposed that through his above said letters, he had informed that accused was appointed as Photographic Officer in AFFPD, Ministry of Defence in July, 1986. The performance of the accused was not satisfactory and accused was also found responsible for certain misconduct. Initially probation of the accused was extended till the competent authority came to the conclusion that he was unfit for removal from probation. In view of overall performance of the accused, DPC recommended that accused Tarsem Lal Verma be discharged from the service. The above contention was supported by documentary evidence through the above said enclosures with his letter.
11. PW-14 Dr. A.Shankara Reddy deposed that from the year 1994 to 2008, he was the Principal of Shri Venkateshwara College, University of Delhi. On receipt of an application alongwith documents from the IO of the present matter for verification of his signatures on the documents, he gave his reply dated 23.07.1998 wherein he stated that the documents did not bear his signatures and they were forged/ not authentic as the same were not attested by him. His said reply already proved as Ex.PW12/D. After seeing the six experience certificates in the name of accused, issued from various departments i.e. one Employment FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 8 of 14 PS Civil Lines Registration Card, One Higher Secondary Certificate of Punjab University, Mark-Sheet of Higher Secondary of Rajasthan Education Board, Higher Secondary (Supplementary) Mark-sheet of Rajasthan Board for subject of History, B.A. Degree from Punjab University, Caste Certificate, he stated that the said documents were not attested by him and they did not bear his correct signatures. Further, the stamp in the name of Shri Venkateshwara College on the said document was also forged as the term "Principal" was on the left hand side in the original stamp while on the documents the stamp showing the term "Principal" on the right hand side. The said twelve documents collectively proved as Ex.PW14/A1 to Ex. PW14/A12 and none of the said document bear his correct signatures and they were all forged signatures.
12. The main Investigating Officer of the present matter Inspector Sanjay Sharma has been examined as PW-12, who deposed that on 14.11.1997, the present matter was marked to him for further investigation. After going the same, he made efforts to trace accused Tarsem Lal Verma. During investigation, he came to know that the accused was working in photography unit in Ministry of Defence, DHQ, Post Office R.K.Puram. Thereafter, he sent notice u/s 160 Cr.P.C and accused joined investigation on 02.03.1998. On 11.03.1998, complainant of the present matter B.S.Yadav handed over him 17 type of documents related to the present matter i.e. biodata of accused, photocopy of employment registration card, educational/ professional qualification, details of experience, photocopy of FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 9 of 14 PS Civil Lines mark-sheets of higher secondary examination, photocopy of degree of B.A., photocopy of caste certificate, copy of experience from Pratap Publication, copy of experience as Sub-Editor of Voice of the Week, Certificate of experience from B.B. News and certificate of experience from Rajiv Menon Production, attestation form bearing admitted signatures of accused and original reply to memo given by Director DIP bearing admitted handwriting of accused. He seized those documents vide memo already proved as Ex.PW8/A. He further deposed that on 02.04.1998, he got the experience certificate from Voice of the Week, BB News and Rajiv Menon Production verified from the concerned companies. He examined Mr. K.R. Sunda, Editor of Voice of the Week, who gave his written reply proved as Ex.PW12/A and stated that the certified true copy of experience certificate dated 07.01.1992 of the Voice of the Week proved as Ex.PW12/B, was a bogus document as he never remained as Editor in Chief in Voice of Week and that his signatures were also forged. Thereafter, he visited the address mentioned in the certificate of letter head of Rajiv Menon Production and met Mr. Suresh Kumar, who was running a shop at the said address. Suresh Kumar stated him that no company in the name of Rajiv Menon Production remained at the said address and he did not know any Vijay Kumar as ever residing at the said address. He recorded his statement u/s 161 Cr.P.C proved as Ex.PW12/C. He further stated that he also collected specimen signatures of accused (running into 28 pages) on 02.04.1998 proved as Ex.PW12/X1 FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 10 of 14 PS Civil Lines to X28. Thereafter, on 23.07.1998, he sent all the questioned, specimen and admitted handwriting to FSL, Malviya Nagar and he also examined A. Sh. Sankara Reddy was the Principal of Shri Venkateshwar College, who gave him written reply dated 23.07.1998 regarding the present matter that all the attested photocopies of documents were not signed by him and bearing his forged signature & were not authentic. His written reply proved as Ex. PW12/D. Accused was correctly identified by him in the court.
13. The remaining witnesses are formal as PW-3 ASI Balraj, only joined when IO took specimen signature & handwriting of accused and he signed the memo of specimen signature as a witness. The specimen handwriting and signature sheets proved as Ex.PW3/A1 to Ex.PW3/A29. Accused was correctly identified by him in the court.
PW-4 Retired ASI Diwan Singh proved the complaint and his report for transfer to the concerned PS as Ex.PW4/A. He further deposed that during inquiry, he recorded the statement of Shehzad proved as Ex.PW4/B. PW-10 Inspector Sunil Kumar proved his endorsement on the present complaint as Ex.PW10/A.
14. PW-11 Inspector Mukesh Kumar deposed that on 16.10.1999, investigation of the present matter was handed over to him for further investigation. On 26.10.1999 to 02.11.1999, he recorded the statement of witnesses namely Sh. Virender Singh, Sh. Abraham Parthipati and Sh. V.K. Sinha in the present matter. After completion of the FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 11 of 14 PS Civil Lines present investigation, he prepared the draft charge-sheet and handed over the file to the then SHO.
15. PW-13 ACP Vijay Singh deposed that on 22.11.1998, he formally arrested the accused and then released him on bail. On 03.12.1998, he was transferred to Crime Branch and thus, he deposited the case file with the MHC (R ). Accused was correctly identified by him in the court.
16. PW-15 Inspector Harish Chander deposed that the present case was marked to him on 15.12.1998 and accordingly, he perused the same. The FSL exhibits were already deposited with FSL, Malviya Nagar and the report was awaited.
17. Despite lengthy cross-examination, the defence could not demolish the stand of prosecution witnesses, hence, their testimony inspires the confidence of this court, which is based on the documentary evidence on record.
18. However, accused chose to lead evidence in his defence and he examined himself as DW-1 and Sh. Bhagwan as DW-2. DW-1 deposed that during his service in Ministry of Defence, his work & conduct was highly appreciated by all Senior Officers. He proved some of the certificates/ appreciation letters as Ex.DW1/E1 to Ex.DW1/E7 FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 12 of 14 PS Civil Lines (collectively).
19. DW-2 Sh. Bhagwan deposed that the requisite record has been destroyed due to fire. After seeing the photocopy of new item published on 06.02.2003 in Times of India, New Delhi Edition's at Page-5, he stated that he cannot confirm the aforesaid news being a photocopy and the same is marked as Mark-A.
20. The FSL report No.98/D-1039 dated 24.12.2001 on record and admissible under section 293 Cr.PC confirms that questioned signatures Q1 to Q13 & Q29 to Q32 are of the same person, who wrote the specimen handwriting and signatures S1 to S29 & A1. It is pertinent to mention here that S1 to S29 & A1 are the specimen handwriting & signatures of the accused, taken by the IO, during investigation and proved as Ex.PW12/X1 to Ex.PW12/X28. Further, Q1 to Q9 is the attestation form filled by the accused including his signatures at Q8. Q10 is the signatures of accused in the application form for the post of Assistant Information Officer, wherein he has relied upon his experience certificate. Q3A are the experience certificates furnished by the accused and proved as Ex.PW14/A1 to Ex.PW14/A12.
21. In view of the testimonies of prosecution witnesses which is based on documentary evidence and the FSL report, prosecution has been able to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt that FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 13 of 14 PS Civil Lines he applied for the post of Assistant information Officer in Directorate of Information & Publicity, Govt. of NCT of Delhi on the basis of forged experience certificate. Accordingly, accused Tarsem Lal Verma is convicted of charge U/s 420/468/471 IPC.
Let convict be heard on the quantum of sentence.
Digitally signed by
SHEFALI
Announced in the open court
SHEFALI BARNALA
BARNALA TANDON
Date: 2019.01.31
Today on 30.01.2019 TANDON 16:15:15 +0530
(Shefali Barnala Tandon)
Metropolitan Magistrate-06(Central)
Tis Hazari Courts, Delhi
All pages are duly signed.
FIR No.82/1997 State Vs. Tarsem Lal Verma 14 of 14
PS Civil Lines