Delhi District Court
Cbi vs . Babu Lal Aggarwal Pages ; 5 on 4 December, 2007
IN THE COURT OF SH. CHANDRA SHEKHAR.
MM NEW DELHI
CBI Vs. Babu Lal Aggarwal Pages ; 5
RC.NO. 12 (A)/2005
U/s : U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 and U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC , r/w Sec. 120 B
IPC.
JUDGEMENT
1. Sl. No of the case : 40/5
2. Date of the commission of offence : During assessment year 2002-03
3. Name of the complainant : CBI
4. Name of the accused : Babu Lal Aggarwal
s/o Sh. Kapoor Chand,
r/o H.NO. A-3, Jawahar Park,
Main Deoli Road ,
New Delhi .
5.Offence complained of or proved : U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 and U/S
420 r/w 511 IPC & r/w Sec. 120 B
IPC.
6.Plea of accused : pleaded guilty
7.Final order : Convicted
8.Date of such order : 04-12-07
BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION
1. Precisely the case of the prosecution is that the accused Babu Lal Aggarwal got filed an application form through Rabinder Ram for renewal of Ration Card/Blue kerosene oil card in the name of some persons who never approached him for filing such application form for the purpose of renewal //2// Accused also got filed some documents alongwith the application form which were forged and false . The accused got filled the application form for renewal and got the same submitted in the office of Food and Supply, Govt. of NCT , Delhi, so that he may obtain goods of food supply against those cards and the same may be sold in the open market on higher prices. However, CBI got the information and conducted the raid. During investigation it was found that the persons in whose name application was filed were not traceable at the address mentioned in the application form. The documents annexed with the application were forged . The Food and Supply officials violated the provisions by not verifying the address of the applicant. After investigation charge sheet was filed against the accused U/S 420/468/471 IPC read with Section 120 B IPC and U/S 511 IPC.
2. Cognizance of the offence was taken. Accused was summoned . Copy of the charge sheet and other relevant documents were supplied to him. After scrutiny of documents the case was to be adjourned for arguments on the point of charge, but the accused moved an application U/S 265(B) Cr.P.C. alongwith an affidavit stating that he wants to plead guilty without force, coercion or undue influence and he is aware as to the extent of punishment prescribed under penal provisions against the acts alleged against him.
//3//
3. Notice of this application was given ld. APP Sh.
A.K.Rao , IO Inspector S.S. Buhullar , Ld. APP stated that he has no objection if statement of the accused is recorded in camera for pleading guilty. Thereafter, accused was examined in camera to see if the accused has moved aforesaid application without any force, coercion or undue influence and is ready to plead guilty voluntarily and whether he is well aware about the punishment prescribed for his alleged acts/offences. He was also informed orally as to what is the extent of punishment mentioned under the penal provisions against the alleged offences. After understanding all the aforesaid facts accused pleaded guilty voluntarily , therefore his statement was recorded in camera in absence of ld. APP and the IO.
4. A notice of the fact was given to Ld. APP and the IO that accused has voluntarily pleaded guilty and his statement has already been recorded. The matter was referred to ld. APP, IO, the accused and his counsel for considering the matter for mutual satisfactory disposition of the case. The prosecution and the defense counsel in consultation with each other filed a report on mutually satisfactory disposition of the case .
5. Report on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case filed under the signature of ld. APP, IO, accused and ld. Def.
//4// Counsel was considered. Thereafter , accused was called inside the chamber , attached to the court and it was again inquired from him whether he has participated in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case voluntarily without any force or coercion or undue influence or not. He has stated that he in consultation with his counsel, has voluntarily participated in the meeting for mutual satisfactory disposition of the case . Thereafter , ld. APP , IO and ld. Def. Counsel were called inside the chamber , while accused remained seated there and in his presence they have stated that no force or coercion or undue influence was used by any one in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and filing the report. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid submissions and the report filed by the aforesaid persons a report on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case was prepared U/S 265 (D) Cr.P.C to the effect that parties have arrived to a mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and matter may be proceeded further . All the persons who participated in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case put their signatures on the report U/S 265 (D) Cr.P.C .
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion and statement of the accused recorded in camera, report of ld. APP , IO, ld. Def . Counsel and accused on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and after satisfying that mutual satisfactory //5// disposition of the case has been arised by the joint effort of ld. APP, IO, ld. Def. Counsel and the accused voluntarily and none has used any force , coercion or undue influence and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, accused is convicted for offence U/S 420/468 read with Section 120 B IPC and Section 511 IPC.
Announced in the open court.
Dated; 04.12.07 (CHANDRA SHEKHAR)
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
NEW DELHI
IN THE COURT OF SH. CHANDRA SHEKHAR.
MM NEW DELHI
CBI Vs. Rabinder Ram Pages ; 5
RC.NO. 12 (A)/2005
U/s : U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 and U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC.
JUDGEMENT
5. Sl. No of the case : 40/5
6. Date of the commission of offence : During assessment year 2002-03
7. Name of the complainant : CBI
8. Name of the accused : Rabinder Ram s/o Sh. Nakhdu Ram, r/o H.NO. B-310, Sanjay Camp, Dakshinpuri , New Delhi -62 .
5.Offence complained of or proved : U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 and U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC.
6.Plea of accused : pleaded guilty
7.Final order : Convicted
8.Date of such order : 04-12-07 BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE REASONS FOR THE DECISION
1. Precisely the case of the prosecution is that the accused Rabinder Ram filed an application form for renewal of Ration Card/Blue kerosene oil card in the name of some persons who never approached him for filing such application form for the purpose of renewal . Accused also filed some documents alongwith the application form which were forged //2// and false . The accused filled the application form for renewal and got the same submitted in the office of Food and Supply, Govt. of NCT , Delhi, so that he may obtain goods of food supply against those cards and the same may be sold in the open market on higher prices. However, CBI got the information and conducted the raid. During investigation it was found that the persons in whose name application was filed were not traceable at the address mentioned in the application form. The documents annexed with the application were forged . The Food and Supply officials violated the provisions by not verifying the address of the applicant. After investigation charge sheet was filed against the accused U/S 420/468/471 IPC read with U/S 511 IPC.
2. Cognizance of the offence was taken. Accused was summoned . Copy of the charge sheet and other relevant documents were supplied to him. After scrutiny of documents the case was to be adjourned for arguments on the point of charge, but the accused moved an application U/S 265(B) Cr.P.C. alongwith an affidavit stating that he wants to plead guilty without force, coercion or undue influence and he is aware as to the extent of punishment prescribed under penal provisions against the acts alleged against him.
3. Notice of this application was given ld. APP Sh.
A.K.Rao , IO Inspector S.S. Buhullar , Ld. APP stated that he has //3// no objection if statement of the accused is recorded in camera for pleading guilty. Thereafter, accused was examined in camera to see if the accused has moved aforesaid application without any force, coercion or undue influence and is ready to plead guilty voluntarily and whether he is well aware about the punishment prescribed for his alleged acts/offences. He was also informed orally as to what is the extent of punishment mentioned under the penal provisions against the alleged offences. After understanding all the aforesaid facts accused pleaded guilty voluntarily , therefore his statement was recorded in camera in absence of ld. APP and the IO.
4. A notice of the fact was given to Ld. APP and the IO that accused has voluntarily pleaded guilty and his statement has already been recorded. The matter was referred to ld. APP, IO, the accused and his counsel for considering the matter for mutual satisfactory disposition of the case. The prosecution and the defense counsel in consultation with each other filed a report on mutually satisfactory disposition of the case .
5. Report on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case filed under the signature of ld. APP, IO, accused and ld. Def. Counsel was considered. Thereafter , accused was called inside the chamber , attached to the court and it was again //4// inquired from him whether he has participated in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case voluntarily without any force or coercion or undue influence or not. He has stated that he in consultation with his counsel, has voluntarily participated in the meeting for mutual satisfactory disposition of the case . Thereafter , ld. APP , IO and ld. Def. Counsel were called inside the chamber , while accused remained seated there and in his presence they have stated that no force or coercion or undue influence was used by any one in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and filing the report. Therefore, in view of the aforesaid submissions and the report filed by the aforesaid persons a report on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case was prepared U/S 265 (D) Cr.P.C to the effect that parties have arrived to a mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and matter may be proceeded further . All the persons who participated in mutual satisfactory disposition of the case put their signatures on the report U/S 265 (D) Cr.P.C .
6. In view of the aforesaid discussion and statement of the accused recorded in camera, report of ld. APP , IO, ld. Def . Counsel and accused on mutual satisfactory disposition of the case and after satisfying that mutual satisfactory disposition of the case has been arised by the joint effort of ld. APP, IO, ld. Def. Counsel and the accused voluntarily and //5// none has used any force , coercion or undue influence and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of this case, accused is convicted for offence U/S 420/468 read with Section 511 IPC.
7. In view of the statement of the accused for pleading guilty, the accused is convicted for offence u/s IPC.
Announced in the open court.
Dated; 04.12.07 (CHANDRA SHEKHAR)
METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
NEW DELHI
IN THE COURT OF SH. CHANDRA SHEKHAR ; MM
NEW DELHI
CBI Vs. Babu Lal Aggawal
RC .No. 12 ( A) / 2005
U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 & U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC ORDER ON SENTENCE Present : Ld. APP A.K.Rao for CBI.
IO Sh. S.S.Bhullar Inspector of Police,CBI- ACB , New Delhi in person.
Convict in person with the ld. Defence Counsel Sh. Govind Shrivastav.
I have heard the submissions of the ld. App on the point of quantum of sentence and on application u/s 3 & 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 read with section 360 Cr.P.C.
Ld. App has submitted that the case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and the convict has voluntarily pleaded guilty . He does not deserve any leniency. Appropriate sentence may be awarded to him so that he should not repeat committing of any offence in future.
Ld. Defence counsel has submitted that the convict had pleaded guilty voluntarily u/s 265 B Cr.P.C. He was convicted for offence u/s 420/468 r/w Section 120 B and r/w Section 511 IPC on 04/12/07. He is a poor man but responsible person . He is having responsibility of his ailing aged father, who is 89 years of age and is completely bed ridden . He is having wife and one son and one daughter who are young and taking education and still unemployed . He himself is a heart patient . He is not a previous convict . The Ld. Defence Counsel requests that one opportunity may be given to the convict to live like a law abiding citizen and mend his ways in life. He requests that a lenient view may be taken against him .
I have considered the submissions of the ld. App and the ld. Defence counsel and perused the record. I have also perused the provision u/s 265(E)Cr. P.C. It seems that keeping in view the age, antecedents of the offender and the circumstances under which he committed the offence; the case of the convict is covered under the clause (b) of the said section and it is expedient that one opportunity to the convict may be given in the interest of justice to mend his ways and live like a law abiding citizen. The accused has been convicted for offence u/s 420/468 r/w Section 120 B and r/w Section 511 IPC . The imprisonment provided for the aforesaid offences is not more than seven years. Therefore, it seems that the case of the convict is covered under the provision 265(E) Cr.P.C. The convict is accordingly released on probation on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount for a term of two years. The intimation of this order be given to the Probation Officer of the area concerned and his report be called after two years on 21.12.2009. The convict is directed to appear on 21/12/09 for further consideration/awarding of sentence if so required .
Announced in the open court (CHANDRA SHEKHAR) on 22/12/07 METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE,ND NEW DELHI IN THE COURT OF SH. CHANDRA SHEKHAR ; MM NEW DELHI CBI Vs. Ravinder Ram RC .No. 12 ( A) / 2005 U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 and U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC ORDER ON SENTENCE Present : Ld. APP A.K.Rao for CBI.
IO Sh. S.S.Bhullar Inspector of Police,CBI- ACB , New Delhi in person.
Convict in person with the ld. Defence Counsel Sh. Govind Shrivastav.
I have heard the submissions of the ld. App on the point of quantum of sentence and on application u/s 3 & 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958 read with section 360 Cr.P.C.
Ld. App has submitted that the case has been proved beyond reasonable doubt and the convict has voluntarily pleaded guilty . He does not deserve any leniency. Appropriate sentence may be awarded to him so that he should not repeat committing of any offence in future.
Ld. Defence counsel has submitted that the convict had pleaded guilty voluntarily u/s 265 B Cr.P.C. He was convicted for offence u/s 420/468 r/w Section 120 B and r/w Section 511 IPC on 04/12/07. He is a poor man but responsible person . He is having responsibility of his ailing aged parents. His brother is still unemployed and is dependent upon him . He is having wife and one son and one daughter . They are minor . He lives in JJ colony and his financial status is very poor. He is not a previous convict . The Ld. Defence Counsel requests that one opportunity may be given to the convict to live like a law abiding citizen and mend his ways in life. He requests that a lenient view may be taken against him .
I have considered the submissions of the ld. App and the ld. Defence counsel and perused the record. I have also perused the provision u/s 265(E)Cr. P.C. It seems that keeping in view the age, antecedents of the offender and the circumstances under which he committed the offence; the case of the convict is covered under the clause (b) of the said section and it is expedient that one opportunity to the convict may be given in the interest of justice to mend his ways and live like a law abiding citizen. The accused has been convicted for offence u/s 420/468 r/w Section 120 B and r/w Section 511 IPC. The imprisonment provided for the aforesaid offences is not more than seven years. Therefore, it seems that the case of the convict is covered under the provision 265(E) Cr.P.C. The convict is accordingly released on probation on furnishing a personal bond in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount for a term of two years. The intimation of this order be given to the Probation Officer of the area concerned and his report be called after two years on 21.12.2009. The convict is directed to appear on 21/12/09 for further consideration/awarding of sentence if so required .
Announced in the open court (CHANDRA SHEKHAR)
on 22/12/07 METROPOLITAN MAGISTRATE
NEW DELHI
CBI Vs. Babu Lal Aggawal
RC .No. 12 ( A) / 2005
U/S 120 B IPC r/w 468/471 & U/S 420 r/w 511 IPC 22/12/07 Present:
Ld. APP Sh. A.K.Rao for CBI.
Defence Counsel Sh. Govind Shrivastav for the convicts. Convicts present in person.
I have heard the submissions of Ld. APP for CBI and Ld. Defence Counsel on the quantum of sentence. Vide separate order, Convict is released on probation for two years in the sum of Rs. 20,000/- with one surety in the like amount .
Convict is directed to maintain the good behavior for a period of two years . Report from concerned Probation Officer be called.
Put up this matter on 21/12/09 . Thereafter , only appropriate orders for consigning the file shall be passed as per circumstances . Ahlmad is directed to maintain the file and put the same on 21/12/09.
MM/N.D./22.12.07