High CourtsSingle Bench(1976) 04 P&H CK 0003

Shri G.L. Bhandari vs State (U.T. Chandigarh)

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 6 April 1976

HON’BLE JUDGES
Gurnam Singh, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 1061-M of 1976

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 334 words

Gurnam Singh, J.—As a result of the third draw of the Haryana State Lotteries, more than one person claimed the first prize as having the winning ticket with each one of them. The first prize was paid to the genuine ticket holder while the others were prosecuted for the offences under Sections 420 etc, Indian Penal Code. In one case Raj Hans and his father Vas Dev Sharma and G. L. Bhandari were prosecuted. Raj Hans Sharma and Vas Dev Sharma were tried while G L. Bhandari absconded during trial. On trial Raj Hans Sharma and Vas Dev Sharma were convicted and sentenced. They filed an appeal in the High Court and the same was accepted and they were acquitted of the charges. The State filed Special Leave to Appeal (Criminal) No. 182 of 1975 but the same was dismissed on 23rd April, 1975.

2.

G. L. Bhandari Petitioner was arrested from Bangalore. The charge against Vas Dev Sharma and G. L. Bhandari was that they bad conspired with Raj Hans to cheat the Government by claiming the first prize. G. L. Bhandari has filed this petition praying that sinee his co-accused have been acquitted of all the charges, proceedings against him may be quashed.

3.

It is not disputed by the counsel for the Union Territory, Chandigarh, that the co-accused of the Petitioner have been acquitted of all the charges. The charges against the Petitioner are similar to the charges levelled against Vas Dev Sharma. in case the Petitioner had been tried alone with his co-accused and convicted by the trail Court, his conviction and sentence must also have been set aside in appeal Under these circumstances if the Petitioner is tried for the same offences, ultimately he will be acquitted in view of the judgment of this Court in the case of his co-accused. This in my opinion there is no use to proceed against the petioner and the proceeding, pending against him in the Court of Sessions Judge, Chandigarh, are quashed.