Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Accused Mahender Singh Mann in furtherance of conspiracy with accused Sohan Pal Sharma @ Pandit ji and others introduced him as his relative, Ram Singh to accused Satish Kumar, Sub Post Master and directed him to place an indent of Rs. 5 lacs to Ashok Vihar Head Post Office to Sohan Pal Sharma @ Ram Singh against stolen/missing KVPs by visiting the Mangol Puri A Block Post Office. It is also evident that though Mahender Singh Mann was on leave even then he went to Mangol Puri Post Office and jointly signed the SO Daily Account with Satish Kumar, Sub Post Master for placing an indent but due to the pricking of his conscious accused Satish Kumar did not accept Rs. 5 lacs from Ashok Vihar Head Post Office, thus, the said Rs. 5 lacs were saved. Mahender Singh Mann again CBI Vs Krishan Madhawa Singh etc. went to post office and inquired about said Rs. 5 lacs by visiting on the next day. On becoming aware from the Ashok Vihar Head Post Office that the money had not been sent by it, he showed KVPs bearing serial no. 31BB­012100 to 012119 and asked him to make the payment to Ram Singh whose identity was confirmed by the accused Mahender Singh Mann. On the pursuation of accused Daya Ram, accused Satish Kumar raised the indent for Rs. 1,50,000/­ for these KVPs. The said Ram Singh had pleaded that his father was seriously ill and he needed the money for his treatment. On the next day, a payment of Rs. 1,62,000/­ was made to said personated person Ram Singh by accused Satish Kumar in the presence of Mahender Singh Mann and Daya Ram.

He had proved that Identity Slip bearing Sr.no. 38 which has been proved as Ex.PW 17/100 and purported to have been issued in favour of Sh. Sunil Mehra and Smt. Kamla Mehra for the alleged purchase of 24 KVPs bearing Sr. Nos. 35 BB 938167 to 35 BB 938180 did not bear his signatures at point A and the seal impression appearing as Sub Post Master (LSG) Aizwal 796810 also did not CBI Vs Krishan Madhawa Singh etc. belong to him and somebody had forged his signatures as well as seal impressions appearing at point B on Ex.PW 17/100. He has further proved that the signatures and seal impressions appearing at points D and E were also fake as the same were not in use in their Post Office at that time. He had further proved that Identity Slip bearing Sr.no. 39 which has been proved as Ex.PW 17/101 and purported to have been issued in favour of Sh. Sunil Mehra and Smt. Kamla Mehra for the alleged purchase of 24 KVPs bearing Sr. Nos. 35 BB 938147 to 35 BB 938166 did not bear his signatures at point A and the seal impression appearing as Sub Post Master (LSG) Aizwal 796810 also did not belong to him and somebody had forged his signatures as well as seal impressions appearing at point B on Ex.PW 17/101. He had also deposed that the signatures and seal impressions appearing at points D and E were also fake as the same were not in use in their Post Office at that time.

PW 23 - SH.RAM NIWAS has stated that he was working as Packer in Post office, Surajpur, Greater Noida, District Gautam Budh Nagar in 1996 and was known to Sri Niwas of his village who was also working as Packer in Postal Department at Gol Dak Khana, Delhi. He also introduced Davinder Kumar, Chowkidar with said Sri Niwas for providing him help.

PW 24 - SH.DEV ANAND adduced that he was working as ASP­1, Sub Division, Ashok Vihar under North Division, Civil Lines, Delhi in 1998. He had proved the letter dated 31.7.1998 as Ex.PW 24/A which was received by him from the office of SSPO Delhi, North Division, Civil Lines, Delhi in connection with checking of issuance of KVPs from Machrauli Post Office, Jhajjer, Haryana. He further identified the signature of Sh.Alok Pandey thereon at point A. He alongwith CBI Vs Krishan Madhawa Singh etc. Krishan Lal, ASP visited the Post Office Machrauli and SDIP, Jhajjer for ascertaining the actual issuance of KVPs from the said Post Office. On comparison, they found that no such KVPs were issued by the said post office and they submitted their visit report (running into three pages) bearing his signature at point A and proved as Ex.PW 23/B. He had proved the working details of Machrauli Post Office prepared by him by identifying the signature of the then Sub Post Master exhibited as Ex.PW 24/C. He had further proved the paper containing details of suspect persons in the matter which was prepared by him in his own handwriting and bears his signature on Ex.PW 24/D. He had also proved the papers containing the name and telephone numbers of Sub Divisional Inspector Jhajjer which was prepared by him in his own handwriting exhibited as Ex.PW 24/E and further proved the paper containing specimen seal and stamp impressions of Machrauli Post Office which were handed over to him by the Sub Post Master of that Post Office on 3.8.1998 as Mark P­2.

Accused Satish Kumar (A6) The charge against accused Satish Kumar is that he was part of conspiracy in the cheating, forgery etc. and that being part of this conspiracy he misused his official position as a public servant to obtain pecuniary advantage for accused Sohan Pal Sharma, who impersonated as Ram Singh for encashment of the stolen KVPs no. 31 VV 012100 to 31 VV 0d121119 and that he misappropriate the Government money being in conspiracy with other offenders. Accused had made a statement under Section 164 CrPC stating all the circumstances. In statement under Section 313 CrPC he stated that he has been exonerated in the domestic inquiry conducted by the department. In his statement under Section 164 CrpC he stated that he was cheated by Daya Ram and Mahender Singh Mann. He further stated that he was working in In Ashok Vihar as Post Officer upto February 1998 and he was posted as Sub Post Master in the Post Office situated in A­Block, Mangol Puri from 1.3.1998. He stated that he objected to his posting as Sub Post Master on the ground that in his service book it has been mentioned that he should not be posted Sub CBI Vs Krishan Madhawa Singh etc. Post Master being the Incharge of the Post Office and that he should not be posted on cash counter as mentioned in his service book. It is stated that despite his objection he was posted as Sub Post Master in A­Block, Mangol Puri, Post Office. He stated that he was posted in this office only for 2 or 3 days. He took the charge from Mahender Singh Mann, who was working as Sub Post Master. He stated that Mahender Singh Mann asked him to prepare indent for Rs.5 lacs as payment to the public persons, which will be made tomorrow regarding the encashment of KVPs. He stated that he refused to do so for such indent of huge amount because there was no security in the Post Office but Mahender Singh Mann and Daya Ram influenced and persuaded him to do so. He stated that he and Mahender Singh Man jointly signed for indent for Rs.5 lacs in daily account of the office. He stated that he remained concerned at his home and even could not sleep because it was such a large amount and anything could had happened. He stated that about 5:00 am next day morning, he telephoned his Head Office, Ashok Vihar, which was received by cashier Har Prasad and asked him not sign any amount of money regarding which the indent of Rs.5 lacs had been sent. He stated that the next date at about 11:00 am Mahender Singh Mann and Daya Ram and one another person came to the office and asked him as to whether the cash amount had come from Head Office. He told him CBI Vs Krishan Madhawa Singh etc. that no money had been received from Head Quarter. It is further testified that accused Mahender Singh Mann showed him KVPs numbering from 31 VV 2012100 to 31 VV 012 and asked for payment to the person, who was with him. He stated that Mahender Singh Man also verified the identity of the said persons as Ram Singh. It is stated that Ram singh had stated that his father was seriously ill and he requires money urgently. He stated that accused Daya Ram is also involved for preparing the indent and this is how he made the payment of Rs.1,62,000/­. He stated that he was not aware if there was a circular of lost KVPs and that he came to know about it only after his suspicion. It is argued by Ld. Public Prosecutor that witness has nowhere proved these facts in his defence. Rather his statement shows that not only he himself that accused Daya Ram was also fully involved in this crime.