Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
M.R. Verma, J.
Dhanna Ram - Appellant
Versus
State Of H.P. - Respondent
Criminal Appeal No. 4 of 1990
Decided On : 24-06-2002
Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Sections 468, 471, 218, 167, 120-B, 379, – Indian Evidence Act, 1872 – Section 10 – Prevention of Corruption Act,1988 – Section 5 (1)(d) (2), 5 (2) –Indian Forrest Act, 1927 – Section 33 – Punishment of criminal conspiracy – Punishment of theft – Forgery for purpose of cheating – Procedure and power of special judge – Appeal – Held, As already concluded hereinabove, demarcation was given by accused Gairu Ram on basis of Musabi and other material made available to him by authority directing him to carry out demarcation – There is not even an iota of evidence on record to show that the demarcation given by accused as per record made available to him was wrong – His demarcation is sought to be proved wrong on basis of documents which materially differ from documents on basis of which he had given demarcation – Other acts attributed to accused persons had been performed by them on basis of demarcation given by accused – Therefore, in given circumstances of case, accused could not have been held guilty and could not be convicted and sentenced – Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
M.R. Verma, J. –
1. This appeal has been preferred by the appellants/accused (hereinafter referred to as 'the accused') against the judgment dated 28.12.1989 passed by the learned Special Judge, Shimla whereby he held the accused including one Chattar Singh (since deceased) guilty of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 167, 218, 379 of the Indian Penal Code, Section 33 of the Indian Forrest Act and Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act and accordingly convicted accused "Dhanna Ram in respect of offences punishable under Sections 120B and 379 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 33 of the Indian Forest Act." Accused Gairu Ram, Nathu Ram, Partap Singh and Chattar Singh deceased were convicted "of the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 167, 218 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 5 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act." The accused and the deceased, however, were acquitted of the heads of charge under Sections 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code." One Om Parkash, who was also a co-accused before the trial Court, was acquitted. The learned Special Judge while awarding sentences to the accused persons did not deem it necessary "to pass separate sentence under Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code" in view of the sentences of imprisonment and fine passed under the substantive penal provisions against the accused persons as follows :
| Sr. No. | Name of appellant | Penal provisions under which sentence passed. | Sentence imposed. |
| 1. | Dhannar Ram | 379 Indian Penal Code
33 of Indian Forest Act | Imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs. 2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further imprisonment of six months.
Imprisonment for six months and fine of Rs. 500/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo imprisonment for 3 months. |
| 2. | Chattar Singh (since deceased) | 167 Indian Penal Code
-do-
218 Indian Penal Code 5 (2) of Prevention of Corruption Act | Imprisonment for one year.
Imprisonment for two years and fine of Rs. 1000 in default of payment of fine, to undergo further imprisonment for 6 months. |
| 3. | Nathu Ram | -do- | -do- |
| 4. | Partap Singh | -do- | -do- |
| 5. | Gairu Ram | -do- | -do- |
2. The case of the prosecution, in brief, is that Sukh Ram (PW-11) owned land comprising Khasra Nos. 20, 21, 18, 32, 40 and 52 situate in village Khagna, Tehsil Chopal. He entered into an agreement to sell the trees standing on the said land to accused Dhanna Ram. Before the standing trees could be sold by PW-11 to accused Dhanna Ram, the land was required to be demarcated and the trees found on the said land and agreed to be sold, were required to be marked by the Forest Officials, therefore, an application for demarcation of the land was moved by PW-11 before the Tehsildar, Chopal. He moved another application to the Divisional Forest Officer, Chopal for marking of the trees after the demarcation of the land was done by the Revenue Officials. The application for demarcation was entrusted, by the Tehsildar to accused Gairu Ram, the then Field Kanoongo, Chopal who carried out the demarcation of the said land in the presence of the Forest Officials, namely, Chattar Singh (deceased) the then Assistant Conservator of Forest, Chopal, accused Nathu Ram, the then Block Forest Officer, accused Partap Singh, the then Forest Guard, accused Dhanna Ram and PW-11. Fifty trees of 'Deodar' and 'Kail' were marked by Chattar Singh (deceased) after the demarcation with his hammer No. HP-1122. Marking lists were prepared and certificates were appended thereto by the accused persons other than Dhanna Ram to the effect that none of the marked trees was on the Government land adjoining the land of PW-11 and deceased Chattar Singh recommended the case of
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
