CRR No.3998 of 2012 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH CRR No.3998 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision:
10. 1.2013 Suresh Chander Aggarwal ..........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble MRS.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Balram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner....Sabina, J.
Petitioner had faced trial in FIR No.63 dated 2.5.1999 under Sections 420,120-B of the Indian Penal Code,1860 (for short `IPC') along with other co-accused.
Vide judgment/order dated 9.12.2010, Suresh Chander Aggarwal (petitioner).Jiwan Kumar Anand and Varinder Kochar were convicted and sentenced qua the commission of offence punishable under Section 420 IPC.
The other co-accused of the petitioner, namely, Hem Lata, Poonam Prabhkar and Pardeep Kalia were acquitted of the charges framed against them.
Aggrieved against the order of his conviction and sentence, petitioner preferred an appeal.
The appellate Court, vide judgment dated 15.11.2011, dismissed the appeal filed by petitioner-appellant- Suresh Chander Aggarwal, with the modification that the sentence CRR No.3998 of 2012 (O&M) 2 qua imprisonment of the petitioner-appellant-Suresh Chander Aggarwal, and his co-appellants was reduced from three years to two yeaRs.Hence, the present petition.
After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that the instant petition deserves dismissal.
Prosecution story, in brief, is that complainant- Roshan Lal came to knot that Nebula Farms LTD.at Shastri Market, Jalandhar ('the firm' for short) was doubling the amount invested with it within three yeaRs.Complainant went to the office of the firm and met J.K.Anand, Managar and Varinder Kochar, Managing Director.
Complainant deposited ` 30,000/- with them.
Varinder Kochar, Managing Director, issued receipts in the name of the wife and daughters of the complainant.
However, the amount invested by the complainant was not refunded to him.
Rather the accused fled away from the Shastri Market.
In order to prove its case, prosecution led its evidence.
Complainant, while appearing in the witness box as PW1, deposed as per the contents of the FIR.
PW2, Paramjit Kaur deposed that on 10.3.1998, she had gone to the office of the firm and had met J.K.Anand over there.
She had deposited ` 50,000/- with him on his assurance that the said amount would be doubled in three yeaRs.On 2.6.1999 she deposited another sum of ` 30,000/- and a receipt was issued in her favour by J.K.Anand.
PW3, Tarsem Kaur deposed that on 10.3.1998, she had visited the office of the firm and had deposited ` 50,000/- with CRR No.3998 of 2012 (O&M) 3 Varinder Kochar.
A receipt in this regard was duly executed by him in her favour.
PW5, Inderjit Singh deposed that he had deposited ` 1,09,000/- with the firm on the assurance given by petitioner Suresh Chand Aggarwal on different dates in the year 1999.
He further deposed that the receipts had been issued in his favour by Varinder Kochar and J.K.Anand.
He further deposed in his cross-examination that he had paid the money to the petitioner and receipts were issued in the presence of the petitioner which were signed by the other accused.
He further stated that he used to visit the office of the firm with the petitioner for depositing money and the petitioner used to supply him the requisite documents.
Thus, from the statements of the witnesses and the documents proved on record by them, it was evident that the petitioner and his co-accused with a view to cheat the investors had taken money from them but, thereafter, had failed to return the same.
In view of the oral as well as documentary evidence led on record by the prosecution, the courts below rightly ordered the conviction and sentence of the petitioner under Section 420 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has failed to point out any misreading of evidence by the courts below.
No ground for interference is made out.
Dismissed.
( Sabina ) Judge January 10, 2013 anita