Punjab-Haryana High Court
Nachhattar Kaur vs State Of Punjab And Another on 7 August, 2014
Author: Sabina
Bench: Sabina
CRR No.2537 of 2012 -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
CRR No.2537 of 2012
Date of decision:- 07.08.2014.
Nachhattar Kaur
......Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another
.......Respondents
CORAM: HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA
Present: Mr. R.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner.
Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, AAG, Punjab.
****
SABINA, J.
Respondent No.2 had faced trial in FIR No.22 dated 19.02.1999 under Sections 420/465/467/468/471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short 'IPC') registered at Police Station Sahnewal, District Ludhiana.
Prosecution story, in brief, was that Nachhattar Kaur-complainant was daughter of Bhagat Singh. Bhagat Singh owned property in Village Durrad, District Patiala and died on 08.02.1974 leaving behind his widow Bishan Kaur and two daughters namely Jaswant Kaur and Nachhattar Kaur. Land owned and possessed by Bhagat Singh in village Durrad was inherited by her daughters in equal shares and mutation was sanctioned in their favour on 08.07.1975. Ishar Singh owned land in village Latton Joga and village Rampur. Complainant and her mother and sister did not SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.12 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2537 of 2012 -2- know about the factum of ownership of land in village Latton Joga and Rampur by Ishar Singh, father of Bhagat Singh. Complainant was married to Amar Singh but she continued residing with her mother, Bishan Kaur. Jaswant Kaur died on 29.08.1975. Bishan Kaur, mother of the complainant had also died as such. Complainant was the only legal representative of Bhagat Singh. Complainant had come to know that Bhagat Singh had inherited land from his father in village Latton Joga and Rampur. However, Jaswant Singh- respondent No.2 by forging a Will alleged to have been executed by Ishar Singh had kept the mutation sanctioned in his favour on 15.03.1986 qua land owned by Bhagat Singh in village Latton Joga. Prosecution led its evidence in support of its case after charge was framed against respondent No.2 under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 IPC. The trial Court vide judgment/order dated 01.11.2010 ordered the acquittal of respondent No.2. Aggrieved against the said judgment, petitioner preferred an appeal and the same was dismissed by the Appellate Court vide judgment dated 02.06.2012. Hence, the present petition.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the record available on the file carefully.
The trial Court, while acquitting the accused has held as under:-
"In order to prove their case accused in his defence examined DW Amarjit Singh who brought the SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.12 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2537 of 2012 -3- original death register of village and deposed that Bhagat Singh died on 9.9.81 and placed the same on file as Ex.D1/1. Accused also examined DW2 registry clerk office of Sub Registrar Ludhiana who proved the will bearing vasika no.71 of 20.2.62 executed by Isher Singh and placed on file copy of the same as ex.DW2/1 and also examined DW3 Navdeep Gupta who placed on file his report regarding examination of disputed signature of Isher Singh on the registered will dated 20.2.62 and standard signature on registered sale deed dated 8.6.86 and proved in the report that the disputed signatures have been written by the same person who has written the standard signatures.
The charge against the accused was that he has forged the will of Isher Singh and thereby used the same for getting the mutation of the property in dispute sanctioned in her favour and thereby cheated the Lrs of Bhagat Singh. But the defence counsel proved on the file that Bhagat Singh died on 9.7.81 and placed on file death certificate of Bhagat Singh as ex. DX on the file and further placed on the file duly registered will executed by Isher Singh as Ex.DW3/1 vide which Isher Singh predecessor in interest of land and father of Bhagat Singh has given the property indispute to Amar Singh to SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.12 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2537 of 2012 -4- the extent of ½ share and life interest in ½ share to Bhagat Singh and it is clearly mentioned that Bhagat Singh has no right to sell, gift or transfer the ½ share and it is also mentioned that after the death of Bhagat Singh the property will devolve upon Jaswant Singh accused and prosecution through their wittiness clearly proved that mutation of the property was sanctioned in favour of Jaswant Singh accused in compliance with the will dated 12.2.62 after the death of Bhagat Singh. Further the prosecution has clearly failed to proved the forgery of the will of Isher Singh and use of the same by the accused for the purpose of cheating the interest of Lrs of Bhagat Singh and it is also proved on the file by PW9 that mutation has been sanctioned on the basis of will dated 20.2.62 and by PW8 that mutation has been duly sanctioned as per law. Further the entire case is regarding the forgery of will of Isher Singh in favour of Jaswant Singh but IO has deposed that he has not taken any will in possession during investigation and shows that further arguments of the APP that Jaswant Singh has misrepresented the revenue department regarding the fact that Bhagat Singh died issue less has not been proved on the file by the prosecution beyond shadow of reasonable doubt and there is no statement on the part of SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.12 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document CRR No.2537 of 2012 -5- Jaswant Singh regarding the said submission on the file. Even the pedigree table verified by the namberdar does not bear the signature of Jaswant Singh and prosecution has clearly failed to prove the cas beyond the shadow of reasonable doubt. Keeping in mind all the above contradictions the case of the prosecution is not fully proved and the prosecution has not been able to establish its case beyond doubt."
Thus, in the present case, Ishar Singh had executed registered Will on 20.02.1962. As per the said Will Bhagat Singh and Amar Singh inherited the property of Ishar Singh in equal shares. Further it was mentioned in the Will that Bhagat Singh had no right to sell, gift or transfer his share and after the death of Bhagat Singh, the property would devolve on Jaswant Singh-respondent No.2. Bhagat Singh died on 09.07.1981. Thus, mutation was sanctioned in favour of Jaswant Singh and he (Jaswant Singh) got the property in question as per the Will dated 20.02.1962 executed by Ishar Singh. In these circumstances, the Courts below rightly ordered the acquittal of respondent No.2 qua the charges framed against him.
Hence, no ground for further interference is made out.
Dismissed.
(SABINA) JUDGE August 07, 2014.
sandeep sethi SANDEEP SETHI 2014.08.12 16:09 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document