Vijay Kumar vs State of Haryana

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.

This order will dispose of Criminal Revision 1514 of 1986 and 1492 of 1986.

The petitioners were prosecuted for the offences under Sections 420/120B/467/471/120BIPC. Both the accusedpetitioners were convicted in case No. 76/2 of 1984 by Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Panipat on the basis of evidence for the offences under Sections 120B, 467, 471 and 420 IPC read with Section 34 IPC.

Accused Vijay Kumar was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ under Sections 471/120B IPC and in default of payment of fine, further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ under Sections 467/120B IPC, and in default of payment of fine, further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/ under Sections 420/120B IPC and in default of payment of fine, further undergo imprisonment for six months. Accused Harish Kumar was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ under Section 471/120B IPC and in default of payment of fine, further undergo RI for six months. He was, also sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 2000/ under Sections 467/120B IPC and in default of payment of fine, further undergo imprisonment for six months. He was further sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of nine months and to pay a fine of Rs. 1500/ under Sections 420/120B IPC and in default of payment of fine, the accused was to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.

Aggrieved by the said conviction and sentences imposed by the learned Magistrate, the accusedpetitioners preferred two appeals in criminal appeals No. 45 of 1986 and 52 of 1986 on the file of Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal, who confirmed the conviction and sentences imposed by the learned Magistrate by his order dated 1.12.1986. Aggrieved by the same, the petitioners who were the accused filed two criminal revision petitions, namely, 1514 of 1986 of 1492 of 1986.

According to the case of the prosecution, the accused Harish Kumar, who is the petitioner in Cri. Revision No. 1492 of 1986 opened a savings bank account No. 5627 with Panipat branch of Central Cooperative Bank, Karnal. He gave a cheque for Rs. 1200/ in connivance with Krishan Kumar, who was working as a Clerk in the Central Cooperative Bank, Karnal, without sufficient balance in his account and the said Krishan Kumar cleared the cheque by making fictitious entries in the ledger. Likewise, he also encashed a cheque of Rs. 8000/ in connivance with Krishan Kumar. He also encashed another cheque for Rs. 500/. Thus, in all, the accused Harish Kumar collected a sum of Rs. 9,700/.

Likewise, the accused Vijay Kumar also had a saving bank account No. 5303 with the Panipat branch of the Bank and issued cheques without having sufficient funds. The accused in connivance with Krishan Kumar withdrew a sum of Rs. 9485/ from the Bank. These transactions took place in the year 1978 79.

On the basis of a complaint given by the Manager of the bank, a case was registered against both the accused and on the basis of the evidence both of them were convicted and their conviction was upheld by the Additional Sessions Judge.

I do not find any ground for interfering in the convictions imposed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge on the petitioners and evidence on the record clearly shows that both the accused encashed cheques without having sufficient funds in their accounts. The accusedpetitioner had already been in jail for some time. The offences took place some time in the year 197879 i.e. about more than 16 years ago. The accused Harish Kumar has paid an amount of Rs. 37044/ with Panipat branch of Central Cooperative Bank, Karnal. He also filed a receipt issued by the Panipat branch of Central Cooperative Bank, Karnal dated 25.3.1995.

In the circumstances of the case, I do not think it proper to send the accused to jail for the remaining period of imprisonment. I accordingly, reduce the sentence of imprisonment to the period already undergone by the petitioners. Subject to the modification in the sentence of imprisonment as indicated above, the revision is dismissed.