Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
4th December 1956
IMAM AND GOVINDA MENON, JJ.
Sudhdeo Jha Utpal Appellant v. The State of Bihar Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 79 of 1955.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Jai Gopal Sethi Sr. Advocate, ( Mr. Naunit Lal, Advocate with him), for Appellant., Mr. Mahabir Prasad Advocate, General of Bihar, (Mr. B. K. Saran, Mr. Brajeshwar Prasad and Mr. S. P. Varma, Advocates, with him), for Respondent.
A, the accused, as the General Manager of a certain limited company owning a large number of motor buses and trucks, plying between the important towns of the State of Bihar, was alleged to have entered into a conspiracy with the Director and Manager for the purpose of cheating the Government by procuring petrol coupons during the years. 1947-1948 when petrol rationing was in operation in the State. The modus operandi attributed to the accused persons was that in the application for coupons for a petrol a number of trucks and buses which were not in a road-worthy condition and for which taxes had not been paid, were included as being in a running condition and on that misrepresentation the rationing authorities were induced to part with petrol coupons which they would not have done if they were apprised of the real state of circumstances. The accused were acquitted of the offence of conspiracy but were convicted and sentenced under Ss. 420 and 193, I.P.C. It was contended by the accused that he did not consciously make a false representation but in accordance with the practice obtaining in his office, signed the application placed before him by the subordinate staff as a matter of routine. In such circumstances it was argued that no culpability should be attached to action of the accused because he had not done anything with a criminal intent. It was not shown that he acted fraudulently or dishonestly as defined in Ss. 24 and 25, I.P.C.
Held: (1) In cases of this kind the burden of proof is never shifted to the accused and that if a reasonable explanation is given by the accused, the jury will have to take that into consideration and if the jury think that the explanation may reasonably be true, though they are not convinced about the truth, they should acquit the accused.
(2) Had the question of conspiracy been proved, the case against the accused might have been stronger but having been found against the prosecution, on the remaining evidence the accused could not be imputed with any knowledge of the falsity of the allegations made in the applications.
(3) Taking into consideration the fact of the ordinary run of official business in concerns like the one in which the accused was the General Manager, the prosecution has not been able to prove that he appended his signature to the applications knowing or having reason to believe that the contents contained therein were false it is the duty of the prosecution to prove affirmatively that the accused knew that the representations made are false and in the absence of circumstances from which it can be gathered that any such knowledge can be imputed to the accused, it is a case in which the benefit of reasonable doubt should be given to the accused.
(4) If the conviction under S. 420 could not be maintained~ then the certificate given that the statements are true, cannot also be made the subject of a charge, and the accused could not be convicted under S. 193 of the Indian Penal Code. - Section 367-Charge of conspiracy not proved-Absence of criminal intent-Reasonable explanation by accused-Accused held entitled to benefit of doubt-Penal Code, Sections 420, 193, 120 B, 24, 25.
Judgement
GOVINDA MENON J.- This is an appeal by special leave against the revisional judgment of the High Court of Patna, by which the conviction of the appellant of offences under Ss. 420 and 193, Penal Code had been confirmed and a sentence of two years rigorous imprisonment passed on him under S. 120-B, read with S. 420, Penal Code, by the trial Court and confirmed in appeal, had been transposed for the offence under S. 420, Penal Code. The sentence under S. 193, Penal Code was also confirmed but was directed to run concurrently with the other sentence. The circumstances relating to the above appeal may be shortly stated as follows : -
One Ramjiwan Himat Singka, who was the Director and Managing Agent of the Express Auto Service, Ltd., was prosecuted, along with the appellant, for an offence under S. 120-B, reed with S. 420, Penal Code, before the First Class Magistrate of Patna, who convicted both of them of that offence, which conviction having been confirmed in appeal by the Third Additional Sessions Judge of Patna, was made the subject of a revision before the High Court of Patna which acquitted both the appellant and Ramjiwan Himat Singha of the offence of conspiracy. As stated already with regard to the appellant, there were convictions under Ss. 420 and 193, Penal Code, which were confirmed and the sentence passed on him for the offence of conspiracy was transposed for the offence of cheating.
2. The Express Auto Service, Ltd., is a private Limited Company, arming a large number of motor buses and trucks, plying between the important towns of the State of Bihar, with its Headquarters at Dumka. The appellant, as the General Manager of the Company, is alleged to have entered into a conspiracy with the Director and Manager for the purpose of cheating the Government by procuring petrol coupons during the years 1947-1948, when petrol rationing was in operation in the State of Bihar. The modus operandi attributed to the accused persons was that in the application for coupons for petrol a number of trucks and buses which were not in a road-worthy condition and for which taxes had not been paid, were included as being a running condition and on that misrepresentation the rationing authorities were induced to part with petrol coupons which they would not have done if they were apprised of the real state of circumstances. So far as the present appeal is concerned, the charge is restricted to nine vehicles which were not in existence or not in a road-worthy condition at the time the applications (Exs. P. 15 and 16) had been filed by the appellant. Four out of these buses, mentioned in Ex. 15, namely, B.R.J. 307, B.R.L.554, B.R.L, 581 and 560, and five trucks out of those mentioned in Ex. 16, namely, B.R.J. 475, B.R.J. 476, B.R.L. 535, B.R.L 547 and B.R.L 550 wore either not in existence, or not in a road-worthy condition at the time Exs. P. 15 and 16 were filed on 5-2-1948 before the petrol rationing authority. In column No. 3 of Exs, 15 and 16 it has been stated that the tax due on these vehicles had been paid up to 31-3-1948. On the strength of the certificate contained in them, namely, that the contents of the applications were correct and that no other application for ordinary coupons in respect of the vehicles mentioned underneath as State carriages, had been made, the petrol rationing authority directed the issue of specific quantity of units of petrol by issuing the requisite coupons. Though there was some dispute as regards the non-existence of the nine vehicles above mentioned, during the course of the appeal before the High Court, it was no longer challenged that the statements in Exs. 15 and 16 to the effect that the tax had been paid in respect of these nine vehicles were wrong and also that the, implied assertion with respect to the three of these vehicles namely B.R.L 547, B.R.L 550, and B.R.J. 554, that they were in a road-worthy condition, was also wrong. The trial Court and the Court of appeal which were the u
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
