Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. In support of its case, prosecution examined eight witnesses. PW1 is SI Hira Lal, who deposed that on 07.11.2000, he was posted at police station Connaught Place and on the same day complainant had made a complaint regarding attempt to cheat by one Mahesh Tanna who had impersonated/ introduced himself as son­in­law of the then Hon'ble Home Minister Sh. L.K. Advani. It was also complained that Mahesh Tanna had demanded Rs.5 Lakhs for getting some work done. The complainant had reportedly CC NO.291/02 FIR No.7/2000 Page no. 2 of 9 verified from the office of Ministry of Home, Govt. of India that Mahesh Tanna is not the son­in­law of the Hon'ble Minister. PW1 further stated that the complainant had informed him that Mahesh Thana was staying in Room no.2228 of Hotel Inter­Continental. Accused was correctly identified by PW1 in the court. PW1 deposed that thereafter they brought accused to police station on 08.01.2000 where the complainant identified him. Interrogation of the accused was then conducted regarding his involvement.

4. PW2 is ASI Rambir Singh, who proved registration of FIR No.7/00 as Ex.PW2/A. He further stated that he handed over the copy of FIR and original complaint to Ct. Shyam Singh.

5. PW3 is SI Bhagwat Prasad, who deposed that on 25.10.2000, he was directed to go to Indore for verification of the address of Dharampal. He got his address verified from Indore, Madhya Pradesh and he returned the file to Addl. SHO and prepared the charge­sheet of this case.

6. PW4 is complainant Saiyed Asghar Abbas Rizvi, who deposed that on December 1999, he was working as Chairman of Energy India Ltd.. He knew one Mr. Dharampal who introduced him to accused Mahesh Tanna at hotel Le Meridian. Accused told him that he is the son­in­law of Sh. L.K. Advani the then Home Minister (Centre). At that time Sh. Amit Goel, Director Energy India Ltd. was also with him. On being informed of the same, PW1 desired to have a cup of tea with him as he wanted to meet with Sh. Advani to which accused agreed. PW4 further deposed that on CC NO.291/02 FIR No.7/2000 Page no. 3 of 9 06.01.2000, he was informed by accused that he had come to Delhi from Bombay. PW1 thus went to hotel Le Meridian to meet accused where he also found Mr. Dharampal present in the hotel. Accused told him that he had spoken to Mr. Advani but since he was busy he could not meet him. On 07.01.2000, accused again called PW4 on telephone and asked him to pay Rs.5 lacs for arranging a meeting with Mr. Advani. PW4 thereafter deposed that he got suspicious and thus inquired from the office as well as residence of Mr. Advani and came to know that accused is not the son­in­law of Mr. Advani regarding which he also gave information to the police. On 07.01.2000, PW4 had given a complaint Ex. PW4/A to the police/ DCP New Delhi. On 08.01.2000, PW4 was called in the police station where his statement Ex. PW4/B was recorded. On the same day, accused was arrested in his presence in the police station where his personal search Ex. PW1/C was also conducted. PW4 correctly identified the accused in court.

CC NO.291/02 FIR No.7/2000 Page no. 4 of 9

8. PW6 is SI Arun Kumar, who deposed on the lines of testimonies of PW1 and PW4. Identity of accused was not disputed by Ld. Defence Counsel. PW6 further deposed regarding recording of statement of complainant Ex.PW4/B and sending of Ct. Shyam Singh for registration of case. He further deposed that he interrogated the accused and arrested him vide memo Ex.PW2/B and conducted his personal search vide memo Ex.PW2/C and recorded statements of witnesses and returned to police station Parliament Street. PW6 further deposed that during investigation he had visited the residence of Home Minister Sh. L.K. Advani for getting his statement but he could not get the same as he was not available. PW6 sent HC Jai Singh and Ct. Mohammad Ashraf for verification of address of accused but his address could not be verified as accused was not found residing there. PW6 further deposed that thereafter, he was transferred and case file was given by him to MHCM.

14. For establishing the above mentioned ingredients of offences in question, prosecution primarily relied upon the testimony of PW4/ complainant Saiyed Asghar Abbas Rizvi who categorically deposed that the accused impersonated himself as son­in­law of then Hon'ble Home Minister of India Sh.L.K. Advani and promised to get arranged meeting with him in lieu of Rs.5 lacs from complainant. Accused was correctly identified by complainant in the court, as also his identity was never in dispute during trial. Moreover, testimony of PW4 remained unrebutted by the accused. Other prosecution witnesses also deposed in sync with PW4 / complainant and corroborated the factum of false representation made by accused to the complainant with dishonest intention to deceive the complainant for making payment of Rs.5 lacs to the accused.