0

The petition is allowed, and bail granted by Punjab high court accused under Sections 7 and 14 of the Foreigners Act of 1946 and Sections

blog ,

TITLE: Mohammad Rahim Ashori v State of Haryana

Decided On-: 04.07.2023

CRM-M-22276-2023

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. Manoj Bajaj

INTRODUCTION- Through this petition under Section 439 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioners seek regular bail while the case is pending in FIR No. 540 from August 12, 2021, which was filed in accordance with Sections 7 and 14 of the Foreigners Act of 1946 and Sections 12 (1A) of the Passports Act of 1967.

FACTS OF THE CASE-

Short facts of the prosecution case are that on 12.08.2021, SI Suresh Kumar, Ct. Parveen Kumar, Ct. Mahipal, and Ct. Manish were present in the area of Bakhtawar Chowk in Sector 39, Gurugram, for the purpose of crime checking and patrolling duty.He learned secretly that Manish, the proprietor of the Sawaram Cafe, is living with some foreigners, including Mohammad Rahim Ashori, son of Adena Mohammad, of Takhar, Chyap, in Kabul, Afghanistan; Hameedullah Salari, son of Nakib; and Abdul Basir, son of Abdul Jalil of village Aftal, city Badakhshan Tehrakulam, Afghanistan; in the home of Prem Lata, wife A raiding party was organised on the basis of confidential information, and a raid was carried out at the Swaram Cafe to find out more about the aforementioned individuals.Mohammad, a resident of Takhar, Chyap, Kabul, Afghanistan, and accused applicant Hameedullah Salari were discovered together, and

The request was made for their passports and visas. Further investigation revealed that the accused applicant, Hameedullah Salari, was residing there without a passport or visa that was currently valid. It served as the foundation for registering the current case.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

Expert legal representation for the petitioners has argued that although they have lived in India for a considerable amount of time, the petitioners are actually citizens of Afghanistan and have only been accused of overstaying their welcome because their passports and visas have run out. The petitioners, who have been in custody for about two years and eleven months, can receive a sentence of up to five years for the alleged crimes, according to the learned counsel. He asserts that although charges were filed on May 29, 2023, only two of the prosecution’s nine witnesses have been questioned thus far, and the trial will take a significant amount of time to complete. Prays for bail

On the other hand, learned State attorney with ASI’s assistance in his response, Sanjay Kumar cites an affidavit from Abhimanyu Lohan, HPS, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Sadar Gurugram, who states that the petitioners’ respective visas expired on July 7, 2016, February 5, and October 10, 2018, respectively, and that they were discovered to be residing in India without a valid passport and visa.The petitioners are being tried for overstaying in India after their passport and visa had expired, according to the court, which finds that there is no evidence that they were engaging in any illegal activity or committing a crime.

Petition allowed, bail granted.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by–  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement

0

Haryana High Court: If the appellant behaves well, will be released on probation.

blog ,

TITLE: Gopal v State of  Haryana

Decided On-: March 28, 2023

CRA-S-870-SB-2004 (O&M)

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice N.S Shekhawat

INTRODUCTION –  Due to violating the terms of the Haryana Food Article (Licencing and Price Control) Order, 1985, the present appellant was found guilty of the offence under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act and given a two-year sentence of rigorous imprisonment.

FACTS OF THE CASE-

The prosecution in the present case was launched on the basis of a written complaint filed by the Assistant Food and Supply Officer, Palwal against Firm M/S Balaji Enterprises, Commission Agent Palwal, and the present appellant/accused was the proprietor of the said firm. According to the allegations, the firm M/S Balaji Enterprises’ premises were inspected by P.D. Sharma, AFSO, and Dharam Chand, Inspector, Food and Supplies Department. According to information provided by the Haryana government, M/S Balaji Enterprises received 3578 quintals and 80 kilogrammes of wheat from Food Corporation of India, Punjab, for distribution, as evidenced by the firm’s stock register.

Aside from that, on 12.01.1997 and 13.01.1997, this firm purchased 319 quintals and 66 kilogrammes of wheat from M/S Jindal Trading Company, Sirsa. From 12.01.1997 to 13.02.1997, this firm received 4028 quintals and 46 kilogrammes of wheat in this manner. The firm should have distributed the wheat in accordance with government rules as well as the Haryana Food Articles (Licencing and Price Control) Order, 1985.

However, the firm issued fake cash memos and even failed to include the correct address of the customers on the cash memos, which is a violation of Clause 9 of the licence granted to the said firm. The aforementioned firm misappropriated the wheat by issuing fake bills and preparing bogus cash memos in which the addresses of the consumers were not mentioned.

The accused had thus broken the terms of the 1985 Haryana Food Articles (Licencing and Price Control) Order, which was punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act. After the police looked into the situation, a challan was eventually filed against the accused in the appropriate court. According to an order from the learned Special Judge in Faridabad dated August 12, 1998, the appellant/accused had violated the terms of the Haryana Food Articles (Licencing and Price Control Order, 1985), which is punishable under Section 7 of the Essential Commodities Act of 1955. He was served with the notice of accusation, to which he pleaded not guilty and asserted his right to a trial by jury.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

Ten witnesses were questioned by the prosecution in support of the charge.Upon completion of the investigation in the current case, PW1 Amir Singh, SI/SHO, prepared the report in accordance with Section 173 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

However, the accused company, whose owner is the appellant, created phoney cash memos and displayed a false distribution of wheat. Additionally, he provided details about the thorough investigation he conducted and the fabricated bills that the current accused had created.He added, during his cross-examination, that no one else in their village had the name Nathan son of Hira Lal. Sanwal Singh Inspector, PW10, who had conducted the investigation, taken possession of the entire file, and recorded the statements of every witness, was questioned by the prosecution. Regarding the police investigation, he gave the information that was true.The statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code after the prosecution’s evidence was concluded, and he pleaded his false implication.  Leaning counsel for the appellant made the following argument: The court made a serious mistake by relying on the testimony of PW10 Inspector Sanwal Singh, who was unable to recover the accused’s stock register and bill books. Additionally, because section 100 of the Cr. P.C. was not followed and no independent witness was added at the time the record was recovered in the current case, the appellant was eligible for an acquittal by this Court. Further, the appellant’s learned counsel pointed out a few minor discrepancies in the testimony of various prosecution witnesses.

I believe that the ends of justice will be served after considering all the relevant facts and circumstances of the current case. If the appellant is ordered to be released on probation instead of receiving a substantive sentence, the conditions will have been adequately met. As a result, the appellant’s conviction for the charge brought against him is upheld, and it is ordered that the appellant be released on probation for good behaviour after posting a personal bond for Rs. 20,000 with a surety for the same sum, promising to maintain peace and good behaviour for a year and to pay his or her fines as and when required to do so during that year.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by–  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement (2)

0

Minor discrepancies do not constitute a violation of section 307, according to the Haryana High Court

blog ,

TITLE: Arjun and Others v State of Haryana & Chaman v State of Haryana

Decided On-:  June 7, 2023

CRA-S-1134-SB-2008 (O&M) and CRR-2263-2008 (O&M)

CORAM: Hon’ble Justice Mr. N.S Shekhawat

INTRODUCTION – In the current situation, justice is delayed, which causes a rift between families and loved ones. The accused’s sentence is determined by the magnitude of the crime.

FACTS OF THE CASE

According to the prosecution’s version of events, the complainant Chaman’s statement was the foundation for the FIR that was filed in this particular case. She was wed to Mohan S/o Nandu, an Alwar, Rajasthan, resident. She travelled to her parents’ village of Bikaner in the Haryana district of Rewari on October 23, 2006, for Bhaiya Dooj. Due to the accused Munshi Ram providing milk to the complainant’s family, her parents owed him some money. She was travelling to the village of Lisana on October 26, 2006, with her injured mother Rajwati in order to harvest the rice crop. However, as they were passing through the accused Munshi Ram’s “Nohra” (courtyard), Munshi Ram spotted them and began verbally abusing her mother. Rajwati, her mother, asked him to refrain from mistreating them because they planned to settle the entire debt within a day or so. However, Munshi Ram, Ganga Ram, Sanjay, and their father Arjun Singh—all of whom were charged—came out of the Nohra (courtyard) bearing lathis, and Munshi Ram struck her mother Rajwati in the nose with one of the weapons. Sanjay and Ganga Ram each delivered a lathi blow to her mother’s head, and Ganga Ram also struck her mother in the forehead. After that, Arjun struck her mother’s abdomen with a lathi blow. Munshi Ram, the accused, struck her with a lathi on the right side of her forehead when she attempted to save her mother, and Ganga Ram struck her with a lathi on the back of her. head. The complainant and her mother called for help, and when her brother Dharmender and Mahesh heard them, they came to the scene and freed the women from the attackers’ grasp.

Then, the appellants/accused returned to their Nohra (courtyard) and threatened to murder them when they had the opportunity to do so.

COURT ANALYSIS AND DECISION

The prosecution cross-examined ten witnesses to help make its case. The following injuries were discovered during the prosecution’s questioning of PW-Dr. J.K. Saini, who medico-legally examined Smt. Rajwati on October 26, 2006, with a history of physical assault by Arjun, Munshi, Ganga Ram, Sanjay, and Kashmina in the village of Bikaner. All the witnesses of the prosecution were  in support of the petitioners Enclosing their evidence, the appellants told this hon’ble court an additional tale. Following their modest submissions, the court reached a decision, having a comprehensive understanding of the incident.The learned trial court correctly noted good reasons for concluding that the circumstances of the current case did not warrant application of Section 307 of the IPC.

In addition, PW-2 Rajwati’s death was not intentionally caused, and the findings made by the learned trial court do not call for any further investigation. Chaman v. State of Haryana, CRR No. 2263 of 2003, is consequently dismissed because of the court’s interference.

Reliance can be placed on the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme. The appellants’ substantive sentence is reduced to the time already served by taking into account the totality of the circumstances.

“PRIME LEGAL is a full-service law firm that has won a National Award and has more than 20 years of experience in an array of sectors and practice areas. Prime legal fall into a category of best law firm, best lawyer, best family lawyer, best divorce lawyer, best divorce law firm, best criminal lawyer, best criminal law firm, best consumer lawyer, best civil lawyer.”

Written by-  Steffi Desousa

Click here to view judgement

 

1 2