news details |
|
|
| Court awards eight years imprisonment, fine of one lakh fine in a case of fake & forged loan | | | Early Times Report
JAMMU, Sept 23: Additional Sessions Judge Anti-Corruption Jammu Ritesh Dubey today awarded eight years imprisonment and fine of one lakhs on Rajinder Singh for cheating and forgery whereas acquitted Tarseem Lal, Subash Chander Chopra then Chief Manager SFC, Sudershan Kumar Bali then Assistant Manager Transport SFC and Mool Raj Sharma then Senior Assistant SFC Jammu.
Mangat Ram lodged a complaint that he purchased a bus JKQ-5349 in October 1988, in partnership with one Kaka Ram. This business did not turn out to be profitable. As such, he sold the bus in June 1989 to a party hailing from UP. And the route permit of the said vehicle was deposited with RTO, Jammu. In the year 1991, Rajinder Singh approached him along with one Jai Singh @ Raja Dalal, for the purchase of above said route permit, the deal was struck, and he was made to sign various forms and documents brought to him by the accused namely Rajinder @ Shinda.
His passport size photograph was also taken by Rajinder on the pretext of transfer of said route permit. But, after a gap of 13 years, he received a letter from J&K State Financial Corporation (hereinafter referred as SFC) on 17-04-2004 whereby he was asked to pay an amount of Rs.15, 49,495 on account of a loan for vehicle number JKO2B-2174, registered in his name which he had never purchased or owned. On inquiry from the office of RTO, and SFC Jammu, he knew that vehicle stood registered in his name and accused number. 2 Tarsem Lal who was unknown to him, had been shown as guarantor on the loan documents prepared in the office of SFC, Jammu. The accused, in a criminal conspiracy with each other, manipulated fake and forged documents, got a loan in the name of complainant and purchased the vehicle.
A preliminary enquiry was initiated by the Crime Branch and after registration of FIR challan was presented. Additional Sessions Judge Anti-Corruption Jammu, Ritesh Dubey after hearing both the sides observed that with respect to the charge against the accused official of SFC, I have kept into consideration that a line has to be drawn between a negligent performance of official banking business and criminal misconduct.
It cannot be forgotten that the banking business involves such loans in their every day functioning. But to attract the criminal consequence, some overt acts or omissions which are of unimpeachable character need to be established. And in view of the observations made herein before, the material and evidence tendered by the prosecution is not of such a character as may point to one and only one hypothesis which is the guilt of the accused SFC officials.
The court further said that at the same time, the evidence tendered by the prosecution points to one and one hypothesis of guilt of Rajinder and in view of the observation made herein before, the prosecution has succeeded in proving the charge for offences under sections 420/467/468/471 against the accused Rajinder. The Court said that the prosecution has not strengthened its chain of events so strongly by the evidence led by it, as has not been weakened by any reasonable doubt. However, since the offences are not established against the accused except Rajinder the offence of criminal conspiracy and convicted him under sections 420/467/ 468/471. He shall undergo simple imprisonment of three years each for the commission of offences under sections 420/468 RPC. He shall also suffer simple imprisonment for a term of five years each for offences under sections 467/471 RPC. All the said sentences of imprisonment shall run concurrently. The accused shall also pay one lakh rupees for all the offences committed by him failing which he shall suffer a further simple imprisonment for a period of one year which shall be in addition to his substantive sentence of imprisonment. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
