Punjab-Haryana High Court
Punjab State Civil Supplies Co. Ltd vs Pawan Kumar & Anr on 23 March, 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
-.-
Crl. Rev. No.322 of 2009
Date of Decision:- 23.3.2009
Punjab State Civil Supplies Co. Ltd. .... Petitioner
Versus
Pawan Kumar & Anr. .... Respondent.
Present:- Mr. C.S.Bakshi, Advocate for the petitioner. M.M.S.BEDI. (J) (Oral) Crl. Misc. No. 6788 of 2009 Crl. Misc. application is allowed. Delay of 64 days in filing the revision is hereby condoned for the reasons mentioned in the application. Crl. Rev. No. 322 of 2009 Petitioner-complainant Punjab State Civil Supplies Co. Ltd (PUNSUP), has preferred this petition against acquittal in a case which was registere at the instance of District Manager, PUNSUP, Ferozepur, alleging that the respondents had made a false promise with the petitioner to make the payment at the time of delievery of slack coal, but said payment was not paid rather two cheques issued by the respondent were dishonered.
After considering the allegations and the evidence produced on the record, trial Court acquitted the respondents, inter alia, on the following grounds:-
(i)material witness Anoop Singh has not been examined, as such release orders of slack coal did not stand proved;
(ii)partnership deed, placed on record, does not indicate that respondent Pawan Kumar was partner of the firm or he had a right to purchase the slack coal;Crl. Rev. No. 322 of 2009 -2-
(iii)two chequs mentioned in the FIR alleged to have been issued by Pawan Kumar have not been produced on the record;
(iv)no steps were taken up by the investigating officer to take into possession the said cheques which are allegedly dishonored.
The grounds on which the cheques were dishonored and returned to PUNSUP have also not been produced;
(v) There is not an iota of evidence on file to prove the dishonest intention of the accused.
In view of the detailed reasons given, I do not find any ground to re-appreciate the evidence and arrive at a conclusion different from the one arrived at by the trial Court. The respondent has rightly been granted the benefit of doubt.
Dismissed.
This order will not in any manner prejudice the civil rights of the petitioner, if any, in any manner.
March 23, 2009 (M.M.S.Bedi) tripti Judge