Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

1. Through a verdict drawn, on 02.05.2022, upon, Sessions Case No.SC/423 of 2016, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat qua a charge drawn against the accused for offences punishable under Section 306 of IPC read with Section 34 of IPC, proceeded to make a verdict of conviction, upon the accused, and, also proceeded to, through a separate sentencing order drawn, on 02.05.2022, impose upon him, the sentence of rigorous imprisonment extending upto a term of 5 years, besides imposed upon him a sentence of fine comprised in a sum of Rs.5,000/-, and, in default of payment of fine amount sentenced the convict to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a term extending upto 6 months. The convict is aggrieved from the above drawn verdict of conviction, and, the consequent therewith sentence (supra), as became recorded by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sonepat, and, is led to challenge them, through his constituting the instant appeal before this Court.




                                     1 of 13

 CRA-S-867-2022 (O&M)                                            -2-

2. The brief facts of the case are that on 02.12.2013 when ASI Jasmer, Incharge Police Post Sector-23, Sonepat went to Raju Palace in Sector-23, Sonepat then Rakesh Sharma - complainant (PW.9) presented a complaint in which he disclosed that he is Municipal Councillor from Ward No.29, Sonepat. His father Satbir (since deceased) had taken CC Limit of Rs.75.0 lacs from Punjab National Bank, Mall Road Branch, Delhi. His father used to go to the bank. Sharwan Kumar, (2nd accused who has since been acquitted and hereinafter would be referred as 'acquitted accused') was doing the work of intermediator and his father has obtained CC Limit facility from the bank with the help of acquitted accused. On account of this, his father has good acquaintance with acquitted accused, and, accused Ravi Bharti (accused herein). Further that the complainant family received a notice from District Investigation Unit, North District, Lacknow Road, Timarpur, Delhi and in pursuance to that notice, he along with his father Satbir went there. There they came to know that one Pardeep Sharma, Proprietor of M/s Shyam Trading Company has obtained a loan from Punjab National Bank, Mall Road Branch, Delhi by forgery qua which a case was registered therein. Investigating Officer told them that on this loan papers signatures of his father Satbir are appended. His father Satbir told that though signatures on the loan papers of firm M/s Shyam Trading Company are his own but he does not know Pardeep Sharma. Further told that these signatures have been appended by him on the asking of acquitted accused Sharwan Kumar and Ravi Bharti (duo) told him that Pardeep Sharma is their relative. On account of this, complainant and his father met the duo but they did not divulge any details about Pardeep Sharma rather stated that since signatures on those papers are of Satbir, therefore, now they should face the consequences and further that duo will tell nothing. The duo told that since Satbir is a witness on loan papers, 2 of 13 CRA-S-867-2022 (O&M) -3- therefore, he has to pay the amount. From that time, his father Satbir started remaining tense.

3. On 02.12.2013 his father from his Mobile Phone No.9416771454 made a call to the Mobile No.09971089232 of acquitted accused at about 11.00 'O' clock and requested the acquitted accused to provide the details of Pardeep Sharma but acquitted accused stated that he has been asked by Ravi Bharti accused not to divulge any details about Pardeep Sharma. Complainant further stated that he persuaded his father Satbir to remain calm/patient but his father started entertaining tension, felt harassed and by going at the shop of his friend Ishwar Jain consumed some poisonous substance. Ishwar Jain passed on information about consuming poisonous substance by his father to him. The complainant stated that when he was shifting his father to Civil Hospital, Sonepat then he breathed his last. Therefore, he brought the dead body of his father to Raju Palace Banquet Hall. His father has consumed poisonous substance on account of harassment meted out by acquitted accused Sharwan Kumar, Ravi Bharti and Pardeep Sharma. From it, offence under Section 306 read with Section 34 IPC was found to have been committed. Investigations were carried out by ASI Jasmer (PW.21). During investigation, suicide note from the pocket of lower of Satbir was also recovered by the police in which Satbir has mentioned the names of Ravi Bharti and acquitted accused to be the persons responsible for his death. In the suicide note it was clearly mentioned that the duo has lured Satbir in trap, and therefore he has consumed the poisonous substance. Satbir also put his signature underneath the suicide note. The suicide note has been sent to FSL Madhuban for test report.