VINOD S. BHARDWAJ, J. (Oral)

1. The instant criminal revision petition has been preferred against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 29.08.2008 passed by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kapurthala whereby the revisionists-petitioners had been convicted for commission of offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 24 of the Emigration Act, 1983 in case bearing FIR No. 11 of 22.01.2002 registered under Sections 406/420/506 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 24 of the Emigration Act, 1983 at Police Station Sadar Kapurthala, District Kapurthala. The revisionists-petitioners have been sentenced as under:-

Both the sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

2. Further, challenge is also to the judgment dated 18.08.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Kapurthala whereby judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the trial Court were affirmed.

3. The facts of the present case, in brief, are that the FIR was registered on the basis of an application (Ex. PA) submitted by the complainant, Balbir Kaur wife of Kewal Singh, resident of Village Khusropur, District Kapurthala, before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala. The complainant alleged that the accused, Mohinder Singh and Lakhwinder Singh, who were known to her as residents of the same village and were engaged in the business of travel agents, had represented that they could facilitate the sending of her son, Gurmail Singh, to the United States of America. It was stated that, relying upon such representations and after consultation with her family members, the complainant entered into an agreement with the accused, who demanded a total sum of Rs.8 lakhs for arranging the travel. An initial amount of Rs.1 lakh was paid to them and the passport of her son was handed over, with the understanding that the remaining amount would be paid upon procurement of the visa. Subsequently, the accused showed certain documents seemingly related to the visa and demanded the balance amount. Acting upon their representations, the complainant arranged funds by raising loans on interest, including by mortgaging her land and borrowing from a commission agent and relatives and paid an additional sum of Rs.7 lakhs to the accused on 12.05.2000 in the presence of witnesses. It was further alleged that the accused thereafter took her son to Delhi but, after a few days, sent him back without making any arrangements for his travel abroad. Despite repeated requests, neither was the son sent overseas nor were the amount paid and the passport returned. Alleging that she had been cheated and defrauded by the accused persons, the complainant sought legal action. On the basis of the said allegations, the FIR under Sections 406, 420, 506 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 24 of the Emigration Act was registered.

4. After completion of the investigation, the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. against the petitioner-accused was filed on 05.03.2002 and documents were supplied to the accused-petitioners free of cost.

5. Finding a prima facie case having been made out, the petitioners was charge-sheeted for the commission of offences punishable under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 24 of the Emigration Act, the contents of the same were read over the and explained to the accused, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial.

6. In order to substantiate its case, the prosecution examined following witnesses:

Thereafter, the prose