Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.C. RAY AND S.R. PANDIAN, JJ.
State of U.P., Appellant
Versus
Pheru Singh, etc., Respondents.
Criminal Appeals Nos. 132-133 and 531 of 1984
Decided on 16-3-1989.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Prithvi Raj, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Dalveer Bhadari and Miss Rachna Joshi, Advocates with him, for Appellant; Mr. J. P. Goyal, Sr. Advocate, Mr. Rajesh and Mr. V. K. Verma, Advocates with him for Respondents in Cri. A. Nos. 132-33 of 1984 Mr. A. K. Sanghi Advocate for Respondent in Cri. A. No. 531 of 1984.
Constitution of India,1950 – Article 136 – Indian Penal Code,1860 – 120-B,384 r/w 120-B,388 r/w 120-B and 218 r/w 120-B - Breach of trust - Imprisonment - These three appeals by grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India arise out of common judgment rendered by High Court acquitting all these three appellants of various offences with which they all along with one stood charged, tried, convicted and sentenced for various terms of imprisonment - Said who was arrayed as accused died during the pendency of trial and as such the trial against him abated - Trial Court framed as many as ten charges against all accused persons put up for trial under various provisions of Indian Penal Code on the allegation - Committed extortion by putting one in fear of injury to him and dishonestly induced him to deliver money and towards that end took said on same night by the same jeep and wrongfully restrained him - whether the evidence of these two witnesses inspire confidence and are free from any infirmity – Held, learned counsel, appearing for respondents made an attack on prosecution case stating that who was in a stringent financial condition having two establishments might have committed the offence of theft and pretended thereafter as if he had nothing to do with it - This argument was resisted by counsel for the appellant that was already having two fixed deposit certificates to the value even much earlier to this offence and hence he would not have even thought of committing this offence - Furthermore, his conduct of meeting Collector and other officials would indicate that he was innocent - Court see some force in submissions made by learned counsel for the appellant - Facts and attending circumstances lead to an inference that someone else might have committed this foul play taking advantage of the failing health himself might have voluntarily agreed to meet good the loss of money fearing for any criminal prosecution - Learned counsel appearing on behalf of R-1 has alleged that there is no evidence to prove conspiracy and the absence of identification parade is detrimental to the prosecution – Court have already dealt with the similar argument in the earlier part of this judgment, and so it is unnecessary for us to reiterate the same - For the reasons hereinbefore mentioned, court hold that the impugned order of acquittal passed by High Court is neither erroneous nor perverse nor improper and unreasonable resulting in miscarriage of justice and this is not a fit case for interference in exercise of powers of this Court vested under Article 136 of the Constitution of India - Appeals dismissed.
JUDGMENT
S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN, J.:— These three appeals by grant of special leave under Article 136 of the Constitution of India arise out of the common judgment rendered by the High Court of Allahabad acquitting all these three appellants of various offences with which they all along with one Dr. R. V. S. Sharma stood charged, tried, convicted and sentenced for various terms of imprisonment. Dr. R. V. S. Verma, who was arrayed as accused No. 1 died during the pendency of the trial and as such the trial against him abated. Therefore, the trial went on as against RP Agarwal, Mahfooz ali Khan, Pheru Singh and Mohd. Ismail Khan (who were arrayed as accused Nos. 2 to 5).
2. The Trial Court framed as many as ten charges against all the accused persons put up for trial under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code on the allegation, the gist of which we would presently mention, they being that all the five accused on or about 1-3-67 in Mainpuri city entered into a criminal conspiracy, by agreeing to hush up the offence of theft or criminal breach of trust in respect of shortage in Government cash to the tune of Rs. 9600/- on the office of the District Medical Officer of Health Mainpuri and make up the same from the funds of B. D. Bhargava, who was the Head Clerk in the Department under threat of dire consequences, and in furtherance of the said conspiracy on the evening of 1-3-67, Dr. Verma took Bhargava to Kotwali, Mainpuri in a jeep bearing registration No. UPD 9461 driven by Mahfooz Ali and in collusion with Pheru Singh, Mohd. Ismail wrongfully confined Bhargava in the Police Station from 5 p.m. to 10 p.m., committed extortion by putting Bhargava in fear of injury to him and dishonestly induced him to deliver money and towards that end took Bhargava to Agra on the same night by the same jeep and wrongfully restrained him .from 11 p.m. on 1-3-67 to 6 p.m. or 7 p.m. on 2-3-67; Dr. Verma, Pheru Singh and Mohd.
Ismail along with one Constable took Bhargava to his house at Agra at 8. 15 a. m in the same jeep driven by Mahfooz Ali, induced him and his wife to deliver pre-mature fixed deposit receipts worth R& 9500/- and got them encashed from the State Bank
of India at Agra on the same day for Rs. 9427.58. It is further stated that on 3-3-67, Dr. Verma in furtherance of the criminal conspiracy fabricated false evidence by preparing a report (Exh. Ka 6), the orginal of which was sent to Kotwali Police Station where it was entered in the general diary on 3-3-67 and that Agarwal and Mahfooz ali Khan fabricated false evidence by making incorrect entries in Exh. Ka 11 and Exh. Ka 12 in the log book (Exh. 6) of the concerned jeep and that on the 2nd and 3rd of March 1967, Dr. Verma caused evidence of the commission of offence to disappear or criminal breach of trust with the intention of screening the offender from the legal punishment; and that Dr. Verma got the cash books (Exh. 1 to 3) back-dated 1-3-67 and prepared a report (Exh. Ka 6) Knowing it to be incorrect and for this end R. P. Agarwal and Mahfooz Ali made false entries in Exh. Ka 11 and Exh. 12 in the log book (Exh. 6) and similarly Pheru Singh and Mohmad Ismail made false entries in GD and that Dr. Verma on 3-3-67 forged report (Exh. Ka 6) and got it entered in the despatch register (Exh. 4) by antedating the same as if the entry was made even on 1-3-67 and that Agarwal by making the false entries cheated the Government of Uttar Pradesh to the extent or Rs. 12/- in his TA bill (Exh. Ka 15) and Mahfooz Ali Khan cheated the Government to the extent of Rs. 3.75 through his TA bill (Exh. Ka 17) both to them thereby fraudulantly claiming the TA bills.
3. We give the following table with reference to the penal provisions under which all the accused persons stood charged on the above allegations for proper understanding of the case :-
Sr. No. Accused names Section (s)
1. Dr. RVS Verma 120-B I.P.C.
RP Agarwal
Mahfooz Ali Khan
Pheru Singh
Mohd. Ismail Khan
2. Dr. RVS Verma 384 read with Se
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
