Delhi District Court
State vs . 1. Yashpal, on 29 November, 2019
IN THE COURT OF AJAY GOEL
ADDL. SESSIONS JUDGE/SPECIAL JUDGE (NDPS),
DWARKA COURTS, NEW DELHI.
Sessions Case No. 441054/2016
State Vs. 1. Yashpal,
S/o Sh. Shamsher Singh,
R/o B-110, Subhash Park Extension,
New Delhi.
2. Karan Singh,
S/o Sh. Ranjit Singh,
R/o D-968, DDA Flats,
Bindapur, New Delhi.
Presently at:
D-429, DDA Flats,
Bindapur, New Delhi.
3. Naveen,
S/o Sh. Karan Singh,
R/o D-968, DDA Flats,
Bindapur, New Delhi.
Presently at:
D-429, DDA Flats,
Bindapur, New Delhi.
FIR No. : 200/11
Police : Sagar Pur
Station
Under : 489A/489B/489C/489D/419/420/
Sections 468/471/34 IPC
Date of Filing of Charge Sheet : 07.10.2011
Date of Committal of case to sessions : 29.10.2011
Date of Assignment of case to this
Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 1/30
Court at the stage of PE : 24.07.2017
Date of Arguments : 28.11.2019
Date of Judgment : 29.11.2019
JUDGMENT:
Case of Prosecution:
1. The case of the prosecution is that on 09.08.2011, at about 07.00/ 07.30 p.m., Accused Karan had purchased 250 gms Shimla Mirch from Sh.
Rampal, a vegetable vendor at near Shakuntala Nursing Home, Gali No.8, Block-I, West Sagarpur, New Delhi and handed over a currency note of Rs. 50 to him, the price of said Shimla Mirch was Rs. 10/- and Sh. Ram pal returned the balance amount by giving him two twenty notes of currency. Thereafter, accused Karan went to another Rehri at a distance of about 5/6 steps from Rehri of Sh. Rampal and purchased Bhindi for Rs. 10/- and handed over the vendor a currency note of Rs. 50/- and on this Sh. Rampal got suspicion and checked the currency note Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 2/30 of Rs. 50/- given by accused Karan to him and compared the same with other currency note of Rs. 50/- available with him and on comparison, he noticed that the currency note of Rs. 50/- given by accused Karan to him was fake. It is the case of prosecution that said Ram Pal rushed towards accused Karan and apprehended him. In the meantime, some public persons gathered and police was informed.
2. On 09.08.2011, at about 7.35 p.m., an information was received at PS-Sagarpur through wireless regarding some quarrel on fake currency notes at I Block, RZ-5271, Gali No. 8, West Sagarpur, New Delhi and same was recorded by ASI Devender Singh vide DD No. 28A. On receipt of DD No. 28A, HC Kishore Kumar, alongwith HC Sunder reached the spot at I Block, Sagarpur and accused Karan was found apprehended by the public persons. Rampal handed over the fake currency note in the Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 3/30 denomination of Rs. 50/- to HC Kishore Kumar and gave his statement. HC Kishore Kumar seized the fake currency note after sealing the same in pullanda with seal of 'KK' and prepared rukka and sent HC Sunder Singh with rukka to police station.
3. On 09.08.2011, at about 9.50 p.m., ASI Devender Singh recorded FIR No. 200/11 on the basis of rukka presented by HC Sunder Singh before him and he also made his endorsement on the rukka. After registration of FIR, the investigation of the case was assigned to SI Manjeet Singh who alongwith HC Sunder Singh reached the spot at I Block, Sagarpur.
4. Thereafter, search of accused Karan was taken by SI Manjeet in which 11 fake currency notes of denomination of Rs. 50/- were recovered and same were sealed by SI Manjeet in a pullanda with seal of 'MS' and seized vide seizure memo. Search of accused Karan also resulted into recovery of 2 currency notes in denomination of Rs. 20/- which Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 4/30 were sealed by SI Manjeet in a pullanda with seal of 'MS' and same were seized. Accused Karan was arrested by SI Manjeet and his personal search was conducted. He was interrogated by SI Manjeet and his disclosure statement was recorded wherein accused Karan disclosed about involvement of his son co-accused Naveen in preparing the fake currency notes with the help of computer, printer and scanner.
5. It was stated that a site plan of place of occurrence was prepared by SI Manjeet at the instance of Rampal. Thereafter, accused Karan led the police party to his house at D-968, DDA Flats, Bindapur, New Delhi and pointed out a room at first floor of the house where computer, printer and other articles were found and his son co-accused Naveen was apprehended and arrested from his house at the instance of accused Karan. Co-accused Naveen was arrested by SI Manjeet and his personal search was Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 5/30 conducted and he was interrogated by SI Manjeet and his disclosure statement was recorded wherein he disclosed about involvement of accused Yashpal in the present case. At the instance of accused Naveen, an original currency note of Rs. 50/- was recovered which he used to use in preparing fake currency notes with the help of computer. It is averred that said original currency note of Rs. 50/- was sealed by SI Manjeet with seal of 'MS'.
6. Thereafter, at the instance of accused Naveen, 10 fake currency notes of Rs. 50/- were recovered which were sealed by SI Manjeet with seal of 'MS' and were seized. Thereafter, at the instance of accused Naveen, one computer, scanner, CPU, four sheets in the printer under process of printing, 22 sheets having cutting impression of fake currency notes, three syringes, four small bottles of ink, one scissor, mouse, keyboard of computer, adapter and other items were recovered and same were sealed by SI Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 6/30 Manjeet in separate pullandas with seal of 'MS' and were seized.
7. On next date accused Naveen was again interrogated by SI Manjeet in which he disclosed that he had opened bank accounts in the fake name and also has introduced accused Yashpal in the fake account opened in OBC Bank in N. K. Bagrodia School, Sector-4, Dwarka, New Delhi. Thereafter, one day PC Remand of accused Naveen was taken and he pointed out the aforesaid bank to the police party and thereafter, to his house and disclosed that he was in possession of some rent documents in the fake name of Lal Babu Paswan and got recovered the academic qualification documents of Sh. Lal Babu Paswan alongwith one rent agreement and said documents were seized by SI Manjeet. Accused Naveen also disclosed that he was maintaining and operating two fake bank accounts in Oriental Bank of Commerce, Sector-10 Dwarka by the name of Ravi Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 7/30 Sharma and in Punjab National Bank, Palam, Dabri Road by the name of Maan Singh.
8. On 12.08.2011, accused Yashpal was apprehended and arrested at the instance of accused Naveen from near Bus Stand, Mangla Puri, Palam Road. He was arrested by SI Manjeet and his personal search was conducted. He was also interrogated by SI Manjeet. Accused Yashpal got recovered one monitor and CPU at his instance from his house No. B-110, Subhash Park, Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and same were sealed by SI Manjeet. Accused Yashpal also got recovered a printer cum photocopier from plot No. 30/7, Matiala Village Uttam Nagar, New Delhi and same were sealed by SI Manjeet. His driving License was also seized by SI Manjeet. It is stated that accused Yashpal and Naveen had fraudulently opened the bank account in OBC and PNB by impersonating as Pankaj Sharma and Maan Singh respectively and forged some documents and had Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 8/30 taken loan from the banks on the basis of same.
9. On 25.08.2011, specimen writing of accused Yashpal and Naveen were taken after the permission of the court by SI Manjeet. Exhibits pertaining to this case were sent to FSL, CFSL and Govt. Press, Nasik and same were examined
10. After completion of investigation, the charge sheet was filed.
11. Since some of the offences involved in the present case were exclusively triable by the Court of sessions, hence after supplying the documents, Ld. MM committed the case to the Court of sessions. Charge against the accused:
12. On 11.01.2013, after hearing arguments on charge, charge was framed against accused Karan and Naveen under Section 489A/489C/489D/34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Separate charge was framed against Yashpal and Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 9/30 Naveen for the offence U/s 419/420/468/471/34 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Another separate charge was framed against accused Karan Singh for the offence U/s 489B IPC to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Witnesses examined :
13. Prosecution in support of its case examined following witnesses who are as follows:-
PW1 is Sh. Rampal. He is complainant in the present case and he has deposed regarding apprehending of accused Karan Singh after purchasing vegetable from his Rehri by him on the date of incident. His statement recorded by police was proved as Ex. PW-1/A, the currency note seized by police as Ex. PW-1/B, seizure memo of 11 fake notes as Ex. PW1/C, arrest memo of accused Karan Singh as Ex. PW-1/D. PW2 is HC Bala Ram. He deposed that he joined Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 10/30 investigation with IO SI Manjeet and deposed regarding investigation done by IO in his presence in the present case. He proved the arrest memo of accused Naveen as Ex. PW-2/A, his personal search memo as Ex. PW-2/B, seizure memo of monitor and CPU as Ex. PW-2/C, seizure memo of recovery of one printer cum photocopier as Ex. PW-2/D and disclosure statement of accused Yashpal as Ex. PW- 2/E. PW3 is HC Sunder Singh. He deposed that on 09.08.2011, on receipt of a call, he alongwith HC Kishore reached at the spot and met complainant Rampal. He further deposed regarding investigation done at spot including recording of statement of complainant and preparing rukka. He proved the seizure memo of genuine currency note as Ex. PW-
3/A, seizure memo of ten fake currency notes as Ex. PW-3/B, seizure memo of instruments/tools as Ex. PW-3/C, arrest memo of accused Naveen as Ex. PW- Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 11/30 3/D, disclosure statement of accused Karan and Naveen as Ex. PW-3/E and PW-3/F. PW4 is Ct. Bhupender Singh. He deposed that he received four sealed pulandas pertaining to this case from MHC(M) and he reached to Currency Note Press, Nasik Maharashtra and deposited the said pulandas there vide RC No. 50/21/11. PW5 is Sh. Ravinder Gaur, Chief Section Supervisor in MTNL. This witness proved the copy of sale deed as Ex. PW-5/A pertaining to Flat No. D- 968, Pocket-III, Bindapur, New Delhi being owner and said flat was sold by him to one lady Smt. Asha Tripathi.
PW6 is Sh. R. S. Chauhan, Manager of Punjab National Bank. He deposed that he showed documents regarding opening of account by Maan Singh to police and seizure memo of same was Ex. PW-6/A. PW7 is HC Kishore Kumar. He deposed that on Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 12/30 09.08.2011, a call was received regarding quarrel on the fake currency note so he reached at spot with other staff. He proved one pointing out memo as Ex. PW-7/A and personal search memo of accused Naveen as Ex. PW-7/B. PW8 is Ms. Neera Maggo, Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce. She deposed that one account was opened in the name of Ravi Sharma having Account No. 1022 215 1001362 and she proved the account opening form as Ex. PW-8/A. PW9 is Sh. Satya Prakash, LDC in Transport Authority, Janak Puri. He brought the original record of licence No. C04072004398632 issued on 20.12.2005 in the name of Rakesh Kumar and attested copy of same was Ex. PW-9/A. PW10 is ASI Devender Singh. He is a Duty Officer in the present case. He proved the copy of FIR as Ex. PW-10/A, his endorsement on rukka as Ex. PW-10/B, copy of DD No. 28A as Ex. PW-10/C. Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 13/30 PW11 is Sh. Ved Prakash Cheema, Branch Manager, Oriental Bank of Commerce. He deposed that on 22.02.2007, an application for opening of bank account was submitted by one Pankaj Sharma. He proved the account opening form as Ex. PW-11/A, copy of DL and form 16 of Pankaj Sharma as Ex. PW-11/B and PW-11/C. PW12 is Sh. Shailesh Kumar Sinha, Legal Coordinator, Citicorp. Finance India Ltd. He deposed that as per loan agreement o. 11523609, an amount of Rs. 25,000/- was sanctioned to the applicant Pankaj Sharma. He proved the relevant record as Ex. PW-12/A and loan application form as Ex. PW-12/B. PW13 is Ct. Deepak. He deposed that he joined investigation of present case with SI Manjeet Singh on 11.08.2011. He proved one seizure memo of rent agreement election I-card in the name of Lal Babu Paswan as Ex. PW-13/A, some other documents in the Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 14/30 name of Lal Babu Paswan pertaining to school as Ex.
PW-13/B.
PW14 is Sh. B. D. Meena, Office
Superintendent, Pt. Madan Mohan Malviya
Hospital. He deposed that on 28.09.2011, he was posted as Food and Supply Officer in Palam Colony and a notice was served upon him by IO SI Manjeet regarding verification of ration card. He proved his detailed report with respect to above verification as Ex. PW-14/A, one report of Sh. Narender Kumar as Ex. PW-14/B and attested copy of list of weeding out of old record as Ex. PW-14/C. PW15 is Sh. Rajeev Vashisht, Nodal Officer, TATA Tele services. He proved the attested copy of CAF in respect of mobile No. 9212333872 in the name of Pankaj Sharma as Ex. PW-15/A and attested copy of DL of applicant as Ex. PW-15/B. He also proved the attested copy of tariff enrollment form qua above phone with customer declaration form as Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 15/30 Ex. 15/C and PW-15/D. PW16 is Sh. Pawan Singh Rajawat, Ld. MM. He deposed that on 25.08.2011, SI Manjeet moved an application Ex. PW-16/A for taking specimen signatures of accused Yashpal and Naveen, the order allowing the said application was proved as Ex. PW- 16/B, the specimen signature sheets of accused Yashpal as Pankaj were proved as Ex. PW-16/C1 to C3, the specimen signature sheets of accused Naveen were proved as Ex. PW-16/D1 to D3, another specimen signature sheets of accused Naveen as Ravi Shankar were proved as Ex. PW-16/E1 to E3, another specimen signature sheets of accused Naveen were proved as Ex. PW-16/F1 to F3, another specimen signature sheets of accused Yashpal were proved as Ex. PW-16/G1 to G3.
PW17 is Sh. Paramjeet Singh, Legal Manager, ICICI Bank Ltd. He brought the attested copy of personal loan application for loan amount of Rs. Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 16/30 35000/- taken by Pankaj Sharma and attested copy of application form was proved as Ex. PW-17/A, statement of account as Ex. PW-17/B, foreclosure statement of account as Ex. PW-17/C and certificate U/s 65(b) of Indian Evidence Act as Ex. PW-17/D. PW18 is SI Manjeet Singh. He deposed that on 09.08.2011, Duty Officer handed over him the copy of FIR in the present case and he went to spot and met complainant Rampal and accused Karan. He deposed further investigation carried out by him in the present case. The site plan was proved as Ex. PW-18/A, DL of accused Yashpal as Ex. PW-18/C, one letter to MLO and original form were Ex. PW-18/D, report of Income tax department as Ex. PW18/E. PW19 is Sh. Sant Ram MLO, Transport Authority, Janak Puri. He brought the Driving Licence record in the name of Yashpal which was Ex. PW-19/A. PW20 is Sh. Purshottam. He is a witness who was Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 17/30 working in Post office but he resiled from his previous statement.
PW21 is SI Pramod Kumar. He deposed that he had taken sealed pulandas of this case to FSL Rohini vide RC No. 84/21 on 22.12.2011 and deposited the same there and obtained receipt from FSL which he handed over to MHC(M).
PW22 is Sh. Lal Babu Paswan. He deposed that his documents of education were lost somewhere and he reported the matter to PS-Bindapur and also got published notice in newspaper in this regard. He proved his application written to police as Ex. PW- 22/A and copy of NCR lodged to police as Ex. PW- 22/B. PW23 is Sh. Jeet Singh, Sr. Scientific Officer, from CBI, CFSL, Lodhi Road, New Delhi. He deposed that exhibits pertaining to this case were examined by him. He proved his detailed report as Ex. PW-23/A and one forwarding letter as Ex. PW- Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 18/30 23/B. PW24 is Sh. Anil Giri. He deposed that during investigation of present case, IO had shown him a bank account opening form of PNB in the name of Maan Singh and on seeing the same, he stated to police that photograph on same was not his photo and the person in photo was not known to him and IO told him that said account was opened by one Naveen on the basis of forged documents of his flat. PW25 is Sh. Pawan Kumar, LDC, Transport Authority, West-Zone, Janakpuri. He brought the certified details of DL in the name of Yashpal Chauhan and same was proved as Ex. PW-25/A. PW26 is Sh. Vivekanand Tiwari. He deposed that he was working as Area Manager in Risk Containment Unit, ICICI Bank. He proved the loan application form with KYC documents pertaining to loan of Rs. 35000/- in the name of one Pankaj Sharma as Ex. PW-26/A. PW27 is SI Hari Singh. He deposed that on the Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 19/30 instructions of IO SI Manjeet, he went to village Lodibrau, PS-Sasaram, District Rohtash, Bihar and met witness Sh. Lal Babu Paswan and he made inquiries from him and recorded his statement. PW28 is Dr. Virender Singh, Assistant Director, Documents, FSL Rohini. He deposed that question documents with standard documents pertaining to this case were marked to him for examination. He proved the detailed report of examination as Ex. PW- 28/A. He also proved the report pertaining to two hard disks as Ex. PW-28/B and sheets P1 to P8 as Ex. PW-28/C1 to PW-28/C8.
14. Thereafter, Prosecution Evidence was closed vide order dated 18.11.2019.
15. The statements of the accused U/s 313 Cr. P.C. were recorded on 25.11.2019 whereby all the incriminating evidence was put to them to which they denied the case of prosecution and the accused persons pleaded innocence. They stated that they Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 20/30 had been falsely implicated in the present case. During recording of statement of accused persons, Accused Karan and Naveen wished to lead defence evidence, however later on, no witness was produced, hence DE was closed.
16. I have heard the Addl. PP for the State and the counsels for the accused person. The material on record has also been perused.
17. The prosecution of the accused persons had been launched on the statement of the complainant. It is stated by Ld. APP for State that prosecution by producing several reliable witnesses in witness box has succeeded in proving the guilt of accused persons beyond reasonable doubt. It is argued that prosecution witnesses including complainant have duly supported the case of prosecution. There is no contradiction in their deposition. The fake currency notes apart from printer, monitor, CPU and forged documents used in opening of account and taking Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 21/30 loan by accused persons were recovered and seized at the instance of accused persons in the present case. No evidence in their defence have been produced by accused persons to disprove the case of prosecution. Thus there is sufficient material and evidence available on record against the accused persons to convict them.
18. On the other hand, Ld. Respective Counsels for accused persons vehemently argued that the accused persons are innocent. It is argued by them that the evidence of complainant is full of omissions and improvements. In view of improvements made by them, their evidence has lost the credibility and cannot be relied upon to give finding of guilt against the accused persons. It is also argued that no public witness was joined at the time of effecting alleged recoveries from accused and the present case has been planted upon them and they have been falsely implicated in the present case.
Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 22/30 FINDINGS:
19. As far as case of accused Karan and Naveen are concerned, it has come on record that accused Karan Singh is father of accused Naveen and accused Naveen was apprehended at the instance of accused Karan. The present case has rather started from accused Karan when on 09.08.2011, at about 07.00/ 07.30 p.m., accused Karan had purchased 250 gms Shimla Mirch from Sh. Rampal, a vegetable vendor at near Shakuntala Nursing Home, Gali No.8, Block-I, West Sagarpur, New Delhi and handed over a currency note of Rs. 50 to him, the price of said Shimla Mirch was Rs. 10/- and PW-1 Sh. Ram pal returned the balance amount by giving him two twenty notes of currency. It has come on record that accused Karan went to another Rehri at a distance of about 5/6 steps from Rehri of Sh. Rampal and purchase Bhindi for Rs. 10/- and handed over the vendor a currency note of Rs. 50/- Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 23/30 and on this Sh. Rampal got suspicion and checked the currency note of Rs. 50/- given by accused Karan to him and compared the same with other currency note of Rs. 50/- available with him and on comparison, he noticed that the currency note of Rs. 50/- given by accused Karan to him was fake. Thereafter, said Ram Pal rushed towards accused Karan and apprehended him. In the meantime, some public persons gathered and police was informed.
20. It is pertinent to mention here that as per own case of prosecution, it was market area and there were lots of vegetable vendors at the spot, but investigation agency has not bothered to join any public witness in the present case other than complainant. The vendor from whom the accused Karan purchased vegetables second time after purchasing it from complainant was also not joined in the investigation. He admitted in his cross- examination that 7-8 vegetable vendors used to Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 24/30 sell their vegetables daily. He also admitted that "on 09.08.2011 when accused came to me for purchasing vegetables there was dark and the rehri to which the accused went was approximately at the distance of about 10 meter from mine. At the time when the currency note of Rs. 50/- was given to me by the accused I did not notice that the same is fake. Prior to this incident, I did not see any fake currency note". There is self-serving statement of PW-1 Rampal against accused Karan which is not believe worthy as the above discussed cross-examination does not inspire any confidence in the absence of any other independent public witness available in the market including the other vendors.
21. In contrast to the same, defence taken by accused Karan in his statement U/s 313 Cr. P. C. is also required to be taken into consideration who has stated that he had dispute regarding the price of Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 25/30 vegetables with the complainant on which he started abusing him and he asked to behave properly considering his age. He also stated that when police came, he asked them to take action against complainant otherwise, he will complaint to senior police official on which they got annoyed and implicated him in this case. It is also important to note here that even at the time of effecting alleged recoveries of fake currency notes, computer devices and apprehending accused Naveen at the instance of accused Karan, no public witness was joined by investigation agency despite the fact that the recoveries were effected from residential area. PW-18 SI Manjeet during his cross-examination admitted the factum of availability of guard outside the factory when recovery of one printer was effected by him. PW-18 SI Manjeet also deposed in his cross-examination recorded on 18.11.2019 that "It is correct that neither from the spot nor Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 26/30 from the house of the accused Naveen, I have not recorded statement of any public witness except the complainant". No person from the locality was requested or called for joining the proceedings and the provisions of Section 100 (iv) Cr. P. C. have not been complied with.
22. As far as recovery of computer devices is concerned, in the present scenario, availability of such electronic apparatus is very common and not unique thing. Two hard disks were sent to FSL for examination but as per statement/report of PW-28 Dr. Virender Singh, no relevant data could be retrieved from the hard disk mark Q2 and the data retrieved from hard disk Mark Q1 are only documents and not connected with currency notes in any manner. It is worthwhile to mention here that data retrieved from hard disk mark Q1 was taken on 8 sheets Ex. PW- 28/C1 to C8 and perusal of same shows that out of 8 sheets, three are having prints some particulars and Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 27/30 two sheets are having prints of Election I-card and PAN Card. So the alleged recovery does not hold any water.
23. In view of the above discussion, the prosecution has not been able to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt against accused Karan and Navin for the offence U/s 489A/489C/489D IPC and accordingly, they are acquitted for the charges U/s 489A/489C/489D IPC. Accused Karan is also acquitted for the offence U/s 489B IPC. They are given benefit of doubt.
24. So far as case against accused Yashpal and Navin for the offences U/s 419/420/468/471/34 IPC is concerned, it is observed that photograph of accused Yashpal is there on the bank documents. There is no rebuttal or explanation about the same by him. Further as per FSL report of handwriting expert, the signatures of accused Naveen has been tallied with Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 28/30 some of the questioned signatures/writing. No cogent and valid explanation has been furnished by him regarding his signatures on above documents. Admittedly, no action was taken by both the accused persons when they came to know about having their photo and signatures on documents. On the basis of forged documents, they applied loan with common intention. It has also come on record that accused Naveen was employee of accused Yashpal. Thus conspiracy was hatched by both of them in dark and common intention between both of them can be gathered. The bank documents were sent to FSL with the specimen signature sheets of accused Yashpal and Naveen and report qua their signatures on alleged documents answered positive and tallied in respect of signatures of accused Naveen. Thus scientific evidence in the form of detailed examination report has also come against them. No evidence in their defence have been produced by Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 29/30 accused persons to disprove the case of prosecution and thus no dent could be created to the case of prosecution.
25. Accordingly, the accused Yashpal and Naveen are convicted for the offence U/s 419/420/468/471/34 IPC. The case property be confiscated to the State and in case, no appeal is filed within the prescribed time, the same may be disposed of as per rules. Copy of this judgment be given to convicts free of cost. Both the convicts Yashpal and Naveen are not taken into custody today. They are directed to appear on next date in the court.
26. Be put up for arguments on the point of Digitally sentence on 30.11.2019.
signed by
AJAY AJAY GOEL
Date:
GOEL 2019.12.02
15:07:45
+0530
Pronounced in the open court. (AJAY GOEL)
Dated: 29.11.2019 ASJ/Special Judge (NDPS)
Dwarka Courts/New Delhi.
Sessions Case No. 441054/2016 State Vs. Yashpal & Anr. Page No. 30/30