Back
2019 Supreme(P&H) 976
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Rajiv Sharma, Harinder Singh Sidhu, JJ.
Lalit - Appellant
Vs.
State Of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Appeal (D) No. 212 of 2017, 234 of 2017, 248 of 2017, 270 of 2017, 296 of 2017, 315 of 2017, 333 of 2017
Decided On : 12-07-2019
Vinod Ghai, Adv., Kanika Ahuja, Adv., A.P.S. Deol, Adv., H.S. Deol, Adv., Deepender Singh, Adv., J.S. Bedi, Adv., Sunil Sihag, Adv., Shubhra Singh, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement of direct or circumstantial evidence to prove criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and use of forged documents. The judgment emphasizes the need for a meeting of minds and conclusive evidence to establish a criminal conspiracy.
Headnote:
Criminal Conspiracy - Conviction Set Aside - [MURDER] - [IPC 302, Arms Act 25(1B)(a), 27] - The court acquitted the accused of all charges of criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and using forged documents. The conviction and sentence for murder and Arms Act violations were upheld.
Fact of the Case:
The prosecution alleged that the appellants were involved in a murder case where the deceased was shot by the appellants. The prosecution presented witnesses and evidence to support their case. The accused denied the charges and presented alibi witnesses to prove their absence at the time of the incident.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the prosecution failed to prove criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and use of forged documents against the appellants. The court upheld the conviction and sentence for murder and Arms Act violations for some of the appellants, while acquitting others of all charges.
Issues: The main issues were the presence of the accused at the scene of the crime, the alleged criminal conspiracy, and the use of forged documents. The court also considered the alibi evidence presented by the accused.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that there was insufficient evidence to prove criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and use of forged documents. The court also considered the alibi evidence and found that the presence of some of the accused at the scene of the crime was doubtful.
Final Decision: The court acquitted some of the accused of all charges and upheld the conviction and sentence for murder and Arms Act violations for others. The court set aside the charges of criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery, and use of forged documents.
JUDGMENT :
Rajiv Sharma, J.
Since common questions of law and facts are involved in the instant seven appeals, therefore, these are taken up together and being disposed of by a common judgment.
2. These appeals are instituted against judgment dated 30.01.2017 and order dated 31.01.2017, rendered by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faridabad, in Sessions Case No. 05 of 2013, dated 01.11.2013. Initially, the appellants along with co-accused Anil alias Bhola were charged with for the offences punishable under Sections 148/302 read with Section 149/120-B IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act. Subsequently, additional charge for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420/468/471 IPC was also framed against them. Vide the impugned judgment and order, the appellants were convicted and sentenced as under :-
| Sections | Sentence |
| U/s 120-B IPC read with sections 302/148/ 420/468/471 IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. |
| U/s 149 IPC read with sections 302/148/420/ 468/471 IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. |
| U/s 148 IPC read with section 149 IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. |
| U/s 302 IPC read with section 149 IPC and read with section 120-B IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for life and fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two years. |
| U/s 417 IPC read with section 120-B IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. |
| U/s 471 IPC read with section 120-B IPC. | Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. |
Appellants Hitesh Kumar, Sunil Rawat alias Gyani, Yashpal alias Shakti and Akash Togar alias Chumma were also convicted and sentenced as under:-
| Sections | Sentence |
| U/s 25 (1B) (a) of the Arms Act. | Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. |
| U/s 27 of the Arms Act. | Rigorous imprisonment for three years and fine of Rs.10,000/- each and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for six months. |
Appellant Vinod alias Kaika was also convicted and sentenced as under :-
| Sections | Sentence |
| U/s 25 (1B) (a) of the Arms Act. | Rigorous imprisonment for one year and fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for two months. |
3. Co-Accused Anil alias Bhola was enlarged on bail. He absconded during trial. Thereafter, he was declared proclaimed offender vide order dated 14.11.2014.
4. The case of the prosecution, in a nutshell, is that Brijpal (PW.1) had lodged complaint to the effect that his younger brother Madan Pal was having some money transaction with Hitesh son of Nanak. In the evening of 12.07.2013, Hitesh called Madan Pal to village Atali to take the payment. The complainant instead of sending Madan Pal sent his son Jitender to take the money. However, Hitesh refused to make the payment and insisted on sending Madan Pal. Complainant along with Madan Pal and Kuldeep went by a Swift car. When they reached near wine shop, Sector 2, they stopped their car to answer the call of nature. When Madan Pal was going towards wine shop, meanwhile, a Scorpio vehicle came from the back side. Hitesh, Dharmender, Gyani and Lalit started firing upon Madan Pal with their count
