JAGDISH SINGH KHEHAR
Narinder Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab – Respondent
J.S.Khehar, J.
1. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, contended that the crime allegedly committed by the petitioner Narinder Singh would not have taken place had the manager of the Punjab and Sind Bank. Kot Mangal Singh Branch, Amritsar conducted physical inspection of the truck bearing registration No.PUU 7337 while sanctioning the loan in favour of the petitioner Narinder Singh. The instant argument advanced by the Ld. Counsel for the petitioner is also misconceived. An administrative lapse committed by Chamkaur Singh, Manager of the Punjab and Sind Bank, Kot Mangal Branch, Amritsar, who had appeared before the trial Court as PW7, by not effecting physical inspection of the truck before sanctioning the loan in favour of Narinder Singh cannot exculpate Narinder Singh of his own acts of omission and commission.
2. It was also contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that even the prosecution witnesses acknowledged that when Savings Bank Account No. 7738 was opened in the name of Jarnail Singh in the Punjab and Sind Bank, Golden Temple Branch, Amritsar on 30.1.1981 one of the employees of the bank, namely, Avtar Singh had identified and introduced Jarnai
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.