Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

6. The relevant facts of this case are that A5 S.K. Behl initially had applied and alloted a DDA flat in B-1, Vasant Kunj in 1987. He was issued a demand cum allotment letter on 15.01.1988. The further case of the CBI is that one file RC No. 65(A)/00 CBI VS. PRITAM SINGH & ORS. 12.02.2014 126(9)/88/VK/SFS/III was opened in his name in Housing Branch of DDA which is Ex.PW10/DA (D-18). The allotment of A5 was cancelled as he did not respond to the demand letter dated 15.01.1988. In 1991 A5 sent a letter dated 01.04.1991 Ex.PW10/U (D-18) to the Director (H), DDA for allotment letter. He was informed vide letter dated 31.01.1992 that he should apply in next release.

18. As per the case of the CBI A5 was never issued any allotment letter after regret letter dated 29.03.1995 Ex.PW10/A was conveyed to him and the matter was closed qua him in DDA concerning allotment of a flat to him. As per CBI case no other flat was ever alloted to him. According to the CBI a conspiracy in this case has been hatched whereby movement of file (D-18) was manipulated. Fake possession letter was sent to Executive Engineer SWD-II for delivery of possession, advertisement was given in Hindustan Times on 15.10.1995 and 22.10.1995 and the subject flat was fraudulently got delivered to A5 on 25.11.1995 though it was never alloted to him in the records of DDA nor any demand was raised for this flat nor A5 made any payment. This flat was subsequently sold by A5 to PW13 Capt. Mehar Singh on 04.12.1995 for a price consideration of Rs.30 lac within nine days of taking over the possession by A5.

46. It is submitted that CBI has brought sufficient evidence on record against each of the five accused to prove their involvement. The defence however disputes the correctness of the case put up by the CBI. This court would now examine the role of each of the accused and also the material against them placed on record against them to see what offence if any is committed by each of them.

Role of A1 Pritam Singh :

47. It is argued by the ld. PP that at the relevant time A1 Pritam Singh was working as Assistant Director (H) in DDA. It is submitted that A1 was aware that a regret letter dated 29.03.1995 Ex.PW10/A has been issued to A5 against his earlier allotment which was cancelled by DDA. It is also submitted that A1 was also aware that there was no other flat allotted to A5 by DDA.

RC No. 65(A)/00 CBI VS. PRITAM SINGH & ORS. 12.02.2014

127. Accordingly the evidence of PW-9 and PW-10 would prove that claim of A5 that he received a possession letter lawfully is a false claim.

128. In his statement u/S 313 Cr.P.C A5 has stated that he earlier had applied and allotted a DDA Flat which was cancelled as he did not receive a demand letter. He also confirmed that a regret letter dated 29.3.95 Ex.PW10/A was sent to him. With this letter he knew that his file D-18 was closed so far as allotment of DDA flat in Vasant Kunj area is concerned. A5 has not adduced any evidence to show that he ever applied for Flat No.7129, B-10, Vasant Kunj, New Delhi or any other flat in DDA.