Punjab-Haryana High Court
Rajbir vs State Of Hry on 19 November, 2014
Author: Jitendra Chauhan
Bench: Jitendra Chauhan
CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -1-
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
(1) CRR No.880 of 2007 (O&M)
Rajbir
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
(2) CRM No.M-966 of 2007 (O&M)
Randhir
...Petitioner
Versus
State of Haryana
...Respondent
Date of decision: 19.11.2014
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JITENDRA CHAUHAN
Present: Mr. S.S. Narula, Advocate for the petitioner
(in CRR No. 880 of 2007).
Mr. J.S. Bedi, Senior Advocate with
Mr. Sunil Sihag, Advocate
for the petitioner (in CRR No. 966 of 2007).
Mr. Ajay Gulati, DAG, Haryana
for the State.
****
Jitendra Chauhan, J. (Oral)
The aforementioned two petitions are being decided by way of this common judgment, as the same have arisen out of the KUMAR SUMIT 2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -2- judgment/order.
The present revision petitions has been filed against the impugned judgment dated 12.05.2007, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Panipat, whereby, the appeals filed against the judgment dated 17.01.2006, passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat, were dismissed, vide which, the petitioners were convicted under Section 417 IPC and sentenced to undergo RI for a period of one year, to undergo RI for a period of two years under Section 419 IPC and further to undergo RI for a period of three years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/- each for the offence punishable under Sections 468 r/w Section 471 IPC and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo simple imprisonment for a period of three months.
The brief facts of the case are that both the petitioners/accused secured admission in O.T. Class in the Government College of Education, Sector 20, Chandigarh against the Scheduled Caste category. In support of their candidature, the petitioners attached the Scheduled Caste Certificates with their application forms as Ex.PW5/A (Randhir) and Ex.PW5/B (Rajbir). The Principal of the Government College of Education, Chandigarh, wrote two letters Ex.PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B, requesting the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat to verify the genuineness of the certificates. On verification, it was found that both the accused belonged to Jat Community, which was not listed as one of the caste shown in the KUMAR SUMIT 2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -3- category of Scheduled Caste. The Deputy Commissioner, Panipat informed about the same to the Principal through letter Ex.PW4/A and wrote to the Superintendent of Police, Panipat to register a case, on the basis of which, the present petitioners were accordingly charge-sheeted.
The learned counsel for the petitioners have contended that the trial Court as well as the appellate Court have erroneously passed the impugned judgments/orders, without appreciating the evidence on record. The Principal, Govt. College of Education, Chandigarh, who sent the letters Ex.PW7/A and Ex.PW7/B, for verification of their scheduled caste certificates, was not examined. The case of the prosecution solely rests upon the letters Ex.PW7/A and PW7/B, upon which, the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat called the report from Naib Tehsildar, Samalkha, Panipat and further the Naib Tehsildar marked the same to Patwari, concerned. Neither there is any application form on record nor any scheduled caste certificate which would show that petitioners had in fact applied for admission in Govt. College of Education, Chandigarh, claiming themselves to be the member of Scheduled Castes.
The learned counsel further submitted that no question regarding their caste whether they belong to Scheduled Caste or Jat were put to them by the prosecution in their statements recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. There is no evidence on record that KUMAR SUMIT 2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -4- whether the petitioners were ever students; applied for admission in that Govt. college or whether the petitioners belong to the scheduled caste category. The report of Deputy Commissioner is based on the report of Naib Tehsildar whose report is further based on the report of Patwari. Neither the said Naib Tehsildar nor the Patwari were examined to substantiate the authenticity of the certificates. They were the material witnesses and the present petition deserve to be allowed, on this score alone.
The learned counsel have cited State of Punjab Vs. Hari Singh & Ors, 2009 (2) RCR (Criminal) 143, State of Punjab Vs. Harpal Singh, 1994 (3) RCR (Criminal) 340 and State of Haryana Vs. Naresh Kumar and another, 2003(2) RCR (Criminal) 337.
On the other hand, the learned State counsel argued that the prosecution has duly proved its case beyond the reasonable shadow of doubt. He states that from the perusal of the record available on court file, it is established that both the accused/petitioners used the scheduled caste certificate allegedly issued by the concerned authorities of Panipat for the purpose of seeking admission in O.T. Class. It is further proved that the petitioners dishonestly used the documents i.e. Scheduled Caste Certificate. Ex.PW7/A and ExPW7/B procured through forgery which is duly established on record. The prosecution has duly proved KUMAR SUMIT 2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -5- Mark-B, the application moved by the accused Rajbir to SDO (C), Panipat for issuance of Scheduled Caste Certificate.
The case of the prosecution rests upon Ex.PW7/A and PW7/B, the letters written by the Principal, Govt. College of Education, Chandigarh, to the Deputy Commissioner, Panipat, for verification and genuineness of the Scheduled Caste Certificates, submitted by the petitioner for getting admission in the college. From the perusal of the record, it is clearly established that petitioner/accused Rajbir had filed an application before SDO (Civil), Panipat, for issuance of a Scheduled Caste Certificate in his favour. The original application has been proved on record as Mark- B, upon, which a report had been shown to be made by one Balbir Singh, Patwari, to the effect that accused belonged to Dhanak Caste but in the testimony, PW-9 Balbir Singh, Patwari, has categorically deposed that Mark-B was not prepared by him nor he had appended his signatures on the same. The petitioner/accused Rajbir did not deny his signatures on Mark-B. The Scheduled Caste Certificate issued on the basis of the report of Patwari but the Patwari himself denied his signatures on the same. PW-9 Balbir Singh categorically denied having signed report on the basis of which the Scheduled Caste Certificate.
As per the record, petitioner/accused Randhir also filed an application before SDO (Civil), Panipat for issuance of Scheduled KUMAR SUMIT 2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -6- Caste Certificate , claiming himself to be member of the Chamar Caste. PW-5 Randhir Singh, has duly proved Ex.PW5/A certificate regarding declaration of accused Randhir Singh as Scheduled Caste. Further, the report of Naib Tehsildar Ex.PW7/D duly testified that petitioner/accused Randhir belong to Jat community. The FSL report Ex.PX also established that specimen signatures of petitioner/accused Randhir Singh on Q-3 tallied with the signatures of accused and it is proved that application was moved by the accused before the SDO (Civil) showing himself to be member of the Chamar Caste i.e. Scheduled Caste. Petitioner/accused Rajbir refused to give his specimen signatures. His statement to this effect was recorded by the learned Magistrate on 13.07.1994. A bare perusal of documents Ex.PW7/B and Ex.PW7/C, clearly reflect that both the petitioners/accused dishonestly procured the Scheduled Caste Certificates for the purpose of securing admission in O.T. Class. Further disclosure statement of accused Randhir Singh Ex.PW1/C, clearly shows that the report of Mahavir Singh, Lambardar on the application was got made by him from one Joginder son of Duliya and disclosure statement of accused Rajbir Ex.PW3/A also indicate that the report of Balbir Singh Patwari was got made by him from one Jagdish Lal Gaba. The case law cited by the learned counsel for the petitioners are distinguishable on facts and does not apply in the present case.
KUMAR SUMIT2015.01.13 17:12 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRR No. 880 of 2007 & other case -7-
From the oral as well as documentary evidence, this Court comes to the conclusion that petitioners/accused procured the Scheduled Caste Certificates by deceiving a public servant i.e. SDO (Civil), Panipat for the purpose of getting admission in O.T. Class in Govt. College of Education, Chandigarh and that the prosecution has fully proved its case beyond reasonable doubt against the petitioners/accused.
There is, thus, no illegality in the impugned judgment dated 12.05.2007, passed by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Panipat, and judgment dated 17.01.2006, passed by the Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Panipat and the same, are, hereby upheld and affirmed. There is no merit in the present revision petitions which are hereby dismissed.
19.11.2014 (JITENDRA CHAUHAN)
sumit.k JUDGE
KUMAR SUMIT
2015.01.13 17:12
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document