In a criminal revision, the High Court will not interfere with concurrent findings of acquittal unless the verdict is perverse or legally unsustainable, especially when the prosecution fails to establish key elements of cheating or criminal conspiracy through corroborative evidence.

*****

VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

CRM-21532-2016

The instant application has been filed for condonation of delay of 56 days in filing the accompanying criminal revision petition.

For the reasons mentioned therein, the application is allowed. Delay of 56 days in filing the accompanying criminal revision petition is hereby condoned.

CRM-21533-2016

Application is allowed as prayed for subject to all just exceptions.

Main case:

1. The instant revision petition has been filed against the judgment dated 19.08.2013 passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwani, whereby the accused-respondent No.2 was acquitted, as well as the judgment dated 12.02.2016 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, whereby the appeal bearing No.147 of 2013/2015 dated 07.10.2013/19.11.2015 preferred against the aforesaid judgment of Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwani, has been dismissed.

2. Briefly summarised, the facts of the present case are that a complaint was preferred by complainant-Kalawati wife of Ram Niwas, resident of village Gurera, Tehsil Siwani, District Bhiwani under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. whereupon an order was passed by the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Siwani, resulting in registration of FIR bearing No.39 dated 28.02.2012 under Sections 206, 415, 417, 419, 420, 406, 506, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Siwani, District Bhiwani. In the said complaint, petitioner-Kalawati had alleged that on 03.03.2011, the accused persons, i.e. Ashwani and Suman wife of Ashwani (respondent No.2 herein), came to her house in the presence of her husband and showed their willingness to sell their land measuring 13 kanals 1 marla situated at Dhani Ramjas. The complainant agreed to purchase the said land. On 04.03.2011, the accused/Ashwani Kumar and respondent No.2-Suman are alleged to have come to her house in the morning and submitted documents for verification of their ownership over the land in question. A sum of Rs.2.80 lakh was paid to the accused persons as full and final sale consideration qua the said land. The sale deed was to be executed on the same day. Accused No.1-Ashwani, along with respondent No.2-Suman got executed and registered the sale deed for the aforementioned land in favour of the petitioner vide sale deed bearing vasika No.2688 dated 04.03.2011.

3. By virtue thereof, the petitioner claims to have become the owner in possession of the aforesaid land. Thereafter, the husband of the petitioner met Halqa Patwari on 30.03.2011 after obtaining the sale deed from the office of Tehsildar, Siwani, for the sanction of mutation in their favour, however, Patwari informed that Ashwani had already transferred the said land by suffering a consent decree in favour of respondent No.2 alongwith their minor children and the mutation could not be sanctioned and entered in favour of the petitioner-complainant. Alleging that the accused, in collusion with each other and by hatching a conspiracy, cheated the complainant, the proceedings were initiated.

The Police investigated the matter and, upon completion of the investigation, a final report was filed under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against co-accused/Ashwani as well as respondent No.2-Suman. Copies of the challan were supplied to the accused persons free of cost as envisaged under Section 207 of Cr.P.C., and they were charge-sheeted for commission of offences punishable under Sections 420, 120-B and 506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

4. To prove its case, the prosecution examined the following twelve witnesses: