Research › Search › Judgment

Punjab High Court · body

2005 DIGILAW 1034 (PNJ)

Sriyansh Knitters Limited v. State Of Punjab

2005-09-27

M.M.AGGARWAL

body2005
Judgment M.M.Aggarwal, J. 1. This is an appeal by M/s. Sriyansh Knitters against judgment dated 14.7.1993 of the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, whereby accused Ajit Pal Singh had been acquitted but it was directed that since Bhushan Kumar complainant had not supported the prosecution case regarding recovery from the scooter driven by accused Ajit Pal Singh, therefore, the amount of Rs. 1 lac stated to be recovered be confiscated to the State and deposited in the Government Treasury. 2. In this case, FIR had been registered on the statement of Bhushan Kumar that he was an employee of M/s. Sriyansh Knitters i.e., the present appellant. That on 3.10.1989, he had gone to Punjab National Bank, Industrial Area Branch, Ludhiana at about 2.00 PM and had withdrawn a sum of Rs. 1 lac from the bank. That he had put that amount in the dicky of the scooter but on the way, he was waylaid by four persons and the scooter which contained the cash and some documents had been snatched from him. 3. Subsequently, on the night intervening 10th and 11th of October, 1989, Ajit Pal Singh and Baldev Singh are stated to have been arrested with scooter and this amount of Rs. 1 lac along with five pass-books of the Bank and identity card had been recovered. A rifle was also recovered from Ajit Pal Singh. 4. Baldev Singh accused had expired before he could go to the trial, whereas Ajit Pal Singh was challaned for offence under Section 397 IPC. The material witnesses did not support the prosecution case and, therefore, Ajit Pal Singh was acquitted. 5. No appeal against acquittal of Ajit Pal Singh has since filed by the State. 6. Now this is an appeal by M/s. Sriyansh Knitters on the ground that they are rightful owner of the amount of Rs. 1 lac stated to have been recovered on 11.10.1989 and it should have been directed to be given to them. 7-8 During the course of investigation, this Bhushan Kumar had identified the currency notes to be the same of which he had been robbed. The identification memo is Ex. PG. 1 lac stated to have been recovered on 11.10.1989 and it should have been directed to be given to them. 7-8 During the course of investigation, this Bhushan Kumar had identified the currency notes to be the same of which he had been robbed. The identification memo is Ex. PG. There are orders dated 1.8.1990 and 11.10.1990 on the file showing that during investigation, the police had ascertained and come to the conclusion that currency notes recovered from the accused were the same of which Bhushan Kumar had been robbed and which belonged to Sriyansh Knitters. From these orders, it would come out that even there were stamp of the bank and signature of the cashier on the currency notes which were recovered. These were not given to the present appellant on the ground that during trial, this being case property has to be produced and if given on superdari etc, the currency notes may lose their identity. 9. In the present case, FIR had been registered at the instance of Bhushan Kumar an employee of M/s. Sriyansh Knitters. Although Bhushan Kumar did not support the prosecution case as far as identity of the accused was concerned, but be had stated appearing as PW-4, that he had withdrawn that amount on behalf of M/s. Sriyansh Knitters and then he was robbed of that amount. There is statement of the accused on the file not claiming the case property. 10. Under these circumstances, M/s. Sriyansh Knitters were entitled to this amount. As such, this appeal is accepted. It is directed that Rs. 1 lac, that was the case property, of which this Bhushan Kumar was robbed, which is stated to have been recovered from Ajit Pal Singh accused on 11.10.1989, shall be returned to the appellant. This appeal, as such, is allowed.