Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

13. PW8 produced the Khasra Girdawari register of Khasra bearing no. 1773/1226 measuring area 7 Bigha 14 Bishwa which stand in the name of Sita Ram and cultivation was in name of Khem Chand. He also deposed that aforesaid Khasra was acquired by Govt. on 22.09.2003 vide Ex. PW8/A.

14. After examination of prosecution witnesses statement of accused Madan Singh was recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C wherein he stated that he is a victim of conspiracy done by one Acharya Arun Dev. He was employee of Birla Cotton mill and looking after the Birla Dairy being Manager. Birla Dairy was being run as a tenant on the land of Sita Ram Bhandar Trust along with other tenants. One builder Acharya Arun Dev have evil design on the land of Sita STATE vs. MADAN SINGH Ram Bhandar Trust and he tried to usurp the said land for the purpose of its development and selling thereafter. He also lured him to surrender the possession and become part of his evil design which he refused. In retaliation and to exert pressure upon him he got registered this false case on behest of complainant as husband of complainant was his accomplice.

15. In support of his defence accused Madan Singh examined seven witnesses i.e he himself as DW1, Ramesh Chander/Assistant Directorate General of Health Services as DW2, Vijay Kumar as DW3, Mahender Kumar as DW4, Ranvir Singh Patwari as DW5, Sh. Jai Ram Singh as DW6 and Deepak Jain handwriting expert as DW7.

16. DW1 deposed that he joined Birla Mill Dairy as Manager on 16.07.1960 and he worked there till 22.06.1999. He further deposed that Birla Dairy was closed vide closure notice dated 27.07.1999. He further deposed that Birla Mill Dairy was the tenant of Sita Ram Bhandar Trust who filed suit for recovery through attorney Acharya Arun Dev against the Birla Dairy. The Attorney of Sita Ram Bhandar Trust, Acharya Arun Dev logged 4 FIR against him as he has refused to deliver the possession of Birla Mill Dairy to him and out of 4 cases 3 cases have been decided in his favour. DW1 further deposed that complainant of this case have deposed as witness in 2 F.I.R cases and further IO Jagtar Singh also deposed in Civil case as DW7. DW1 further deposed that he has filed complaint before ACP and DCP (N.E.) regarding false STATE vs. MADAN SINGH case filed against him. Certified copies of same are Ex. DW1/L. He further deposed that pronote Ex. PW1/A does not bear his signatures on 5 revenue stamps as he had not taken any amount of Rs. 6,50,000/­ from complainant. DW1 further deposed that Swaroop Singh is relative of complainant i.e sadu of nephew of complainant. He further deposed that he had never known to the complainant prior to filing of the case. He further deposed that document A1 to A12 does not belong to him nor bear his signatures. DW1 also proved the documents i.e. letter dated 16.09.1999 as Ex. DW1/A, letter dated 22.06.1999 as Ex. DW1/B, letter dated 21.06.1999 as Ex. DW1/C, Copy of suit and judgment as Ex. DW1/E and Ex. DW1/F respectively. Copy of Economic Times dated 07.10.1994 as Ex. DW1/G, Delhi Gazette Notification dated 02.03.1978 as Ex. DW1/H. Statement of complainant deposed in FIR No. 288/1998 as Ex. DW1/1. Statement of complainant recorded in civil suit as Ex. DW1/J. Statement of SI Jagtar Singh recorded in civil case as Ex. DW1/K. His complaint to ACP, DCP as Ex. DW1/L. Khasra Girdawari of period 1996 to 2000 as Ex. DW1/M. During his cross examination, DW1 admitted that all the 4 case F.I.R were registered for offence u/s 420 IPC. He also admitted that all the 4 case F.I.R are related to land belonging to Sita Ram Bhandar Trust. He also admitted that he has not filed any complaint case against complainant. He denied the suggestion to the effect that land measuring 200 sq. yards was shown to Phoolwati for amount of Rs. 10 lacs. He further denied the suggestion that on 10.12.1999, he received Rs. 6,50,000/­ against the pronote executed by STATE vs. MADAN SINGH him. He admitted that he knew Swaroop Singh the marginal witness of pronote.

21. DW6 deposed that Brila Dairy was on rented land of Sita Ram and he knows Acharya Arun Dev very well as he is the attorney of Sita Ram Bhandar Trust. He further deposed that he also knew Phoolwati the complainant as she was farming on the land of Sita Ram Bhandar Trust and grazing their cattle on the land.

During his cross examination he deposed that he had not seen Phoolwati in around roaming at Sita Ram Bhandar Trust.