Criminal Revision No. 3926 of 2012 (Oandm) Vs. State of Punjab - Court Judgment

Criminal Revision No.3926 of 2012 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Criminal Revision No.3926 of 2012 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 10 ,2012 Jiwan Kumar Anand ...........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ..........Respondent Coram: Hon'ble MRS.Justice Sabina Present: Mr.Munish Bhardwaj, 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, Petitioner-Jiwan Kumar Anand, Varinder Kochar and Suresh Chander 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 the petitioner-appellant-Jiwan Kumar Anand with the modification that the sentence qua imprisonment of Criminal Revision No.3926 of 2012 (O&M) 2 the petitioner-appellant-Jiwan Kumar Anand 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 the complainant- Roshan Lal came to knot that Nebula Farms LTD.at Shastri Market, Jalandhar was doubling the amount invested with it within three yeaRs.Complainant went to the Office of the Nebula Farms LTD.and met the petitioner and his co-accused Varinder Kochar.

Complainant deposited ` 30,000/- with them.

Receipts were issued in the name of the wife and daughter of the complainant.

When the complainant sought refund of the amount in question, the accused fled away from the 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 Nebula Farms LTD.and had met petitioner over there.

Petitioner had told her that the amount invested by her would be doubled within three yeaRs.She deposited ` 50,000/- with the petitioner and the receipt as well as guarantee-cum-performance deeds were handed over to her on 2.6.1999.

She deposited `30,000/- with the petitioner and she was handed over another receipt and guarantee cum performance deed by the petitioner.

The witness proved relevant documents on record in this regard.

Criminal Revision No.3926 of 2012 (O&M) 3 PW3,Tarsem Kaur deposed that on 10.3.1998, she had gone to the Office of the Nebula Farms LTD.and had deposited `50,000/- with Varinder Kochar.

She had been issued a receipt, guarantee -cum- performance deed in this regard.

PW5,Inderjit Singh deposed that he had deposited `1,09,000/- with Nebula Farms LTD.on the assurance of Suresh Chand Aggarwal on different dates in the year 1999.

The receipts were issued by Varinder Kochar and the petitioner.

He proved the relevant receipts in this regard.

Thus, from the statements and the documents proved on record by the said witnesses, 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 said amount.

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 misleading of evidence recorded by the trial Court.

No ground for interference is made out.

Dismissed.

( Sabina ) Judge December 10, 2012 arya Criminal Revision No.3926 of 2012 (O&M) 4