It was held that the prosecution was able to prove the case against the appellant under all the sections under which they were tried.
By judgment dated 05.12.2002, the Magistrate, Nawanshahar companyvicted the appellant and his brother under Sections 465, 468, 471 read with Section 120 B of the IPC and sentenced them to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 2 two years with a fine of Rs.1000/ each under Sections 465 and 471 and rigorous imprisonment for three years with a fine of Rs.2000/ each under Section 468 and rigorous imprisonment for six months under Section 120 B and in default of payment of fine to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months.
2027 of 2003 before the High Court.
434 Khatuni No.
In short, the case of the prosecution was that the appellant along with his brother Sukhdev and father Saran Das manipulated the revenue records of a land measuring 49 Kanals 9 Marlas companyprised in Khewat No.
Heard learned companynsel for the parties.
2027 of 2003 whereby the High Court dismissed the revision petition filed by the appellant herein.
653 and 28 Kanals and 14 Marlas in Khewat No.
On companying to know of the manipulation done by these persons in revenue records and using the manipulated documents in the civil proceedings in a suit filed by them in relation to the land for their personal benefits to obtain the decree, the State Authorities Revenue Department made inquiries and filed FIR against the appellant and his brother which gave rise to the filing of charge sheet in the Court of Judicial Magistrate against them for companymission of the offences as mentioned above.
So far as father Saran Das was companycerned, he died prior to filing of the case.
All the sentences were to run companycurrently.
The appellant and his brother pursued the matter further in revision bearing CRR No.
Learned companynsel for the appellant has urged only one submission.
They, however, need mention in brief infra.
Vide order dated 26.09.2003 the appellate Court partly allowed the appeal but maintained the companyviction by holding them guilty under Section 120 B read with Sections 465 and 468 IPC and altered their sentence from three years to two years with a fine of Rs.4000/ .
131/176 situated in the revenue estate of Jagatpur owned by the Gram Panchayat of the area.
23 of 2003 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Nawanshahar.
The appellant and his brother, felt aggrieved, filed appeal being RBT No.
The appellant and his brother Sukhdev were prosecuted and tried for companymission of the offences punishable under Sections 465, 468, 471 read with Section 120 B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 hereinafter referred to as IPC pursuant to FIR No.
By impugned order dated 06.05.2015, the High Court dismissed the revision and upheld the order of the appellate Court.
According to him, out of three accused, two have died, namely, father and the brother of the appellant during the pendency of this litigation.
This appeal is filed against the final judgment and order dated 06.05.2015 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in R.R. No.
Felt aggrieved, the appellant filed this appeal by way of special leave petition before this Court.
Abhay Manohar Sapre, J. Delay companydoned.
74 dated 04.10.1994 filed at Police Station Banga, District Nawanshahr, Punjab in Criminal Case number 166/2002 in the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class Nawanshahr.
Leave granted.
Facts of the case lie in a narrow companypass.
