SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
R.S. SARKARIA AND O. CHINNAPPA REDDY, JJ.
Amritlal Ratilal Mehta and another, Appellants
Versus
State of Gujarat, Respondent.
Criminal Appeal No. 222 of 1973
Decided on 16-11-1979.
Advocates appeared
Mr. Frank Anthony, Sr. Advocate (Mr. K. L. Hathi, Advocate with him), for Appellants; Mr. R.H. Dhebar, Miss Pratiloha Pandit and Mr. M. N. Shroff, Advocates, for Respondent.
* Criminal Appeal No. 731 of 1971, D/- 28-2-1973 (Guj).
Indian Penal Code,1860 – Section 420 and 477-A r/w 34 – Cheated Government - Excise duty - That both cheated the Central Excise Department in furtherance of common intention to cheat Government of excise duty by dishonestly making false declaration in gate passes numbers which were prepared and written by accused No. 1 and signed by accused No. 2 stating therein, Company and were replaced by the said company in Electric Motors and thereby got clearance of Electric Motors without payment of Central Excise Duty, causing thereby wrongful loss to the Central Excise Department and thereby both of you committed offence punishable under S. 420 read with 34 of I.P.C. within cognizance of J.M.F.C - And also that both of them at about same time and place in furtherance of common intention in your capacity as employees wilfully and with an intention to defraud Central Excise Department made false entries in gate passes as mentioned above belonging to employer and thereby committed an offence punishable under S. 477-A read with S.34 I.P.C. and within cognizance J.M.F.C., and thereby direct that you both be tried for above offences by 2nd Court, J.M.F.C. - Whether gate passes were made dishonestly so far as charge under Section 420 was concerned and with intent to defraud so far as charge under S. 477-A was concerned – Held, charges set out by court at the outset show that essential allegation which was required to be proved in respect of two charges was whether the gate passes were made dishonestly so far as the charge under Section 420 was concerned and with intent to defraud so far as charge under S. 477-A was concerned - A finding that the gate passes were made inadvertently and negligently was destructive of both the charges - If for the purpose of the offence under S. 477-A, Court found that entries made by the accused in the gate passes were made inadvertently and negligently but not wilfully or with a view to defraud and that finding became final, it would not be open to Court, later to find, on charge under S. 420, that the entries on the gate passes were made not inadvertently and negligently, but dishonestly - On the facts of present case, court hold that the finding of fact to effect that the gate passes were made inadvertently and negligently and not wilfully or with intent to defraud which led to acquittal of the accused on charge under S. 477-A must, that acquittal having become final, operate for benefit of the accused and lead to their acquittal on charge under S. 420 also - Finding that the gate passes were made inadvertently and negligently, as court said, was destructive of charges under both S. 420 and Section 477-A - Appeal is therefore allowed - Appellants are acquitted - Their bail bonds will be cancelled - Fines if paid will be refunded - Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT
CHINNAPPA REDDY, J.:—To appreciate the question posed in the present appeal, it is necessary to set out in full the two charges framed against the two appellants. They were as follows :-
"I Chandrakant T. Mashla, Judical Magistrate 2nd Court, Baroda hereby charge you
(1) Amritial Ratilal Mehta
(2) Gajanan Bhikhabhai Gandhi both of Baroda as follows :-
That both of you Amritlal Ratilal Mehta and Gajanan Bhikhabhai Gandhi on or about 21-12-65, at Baroda cheated the Central Excise Department, Baroda in furtherance of common intention to cheat the Government of excise duty of Rs. 11,450 (Eleven thousand four hundred and fifty) by dishonestly making false declaration in gate passes numbers 105, 104, 103, all D/- 21-12-65 which were prepared and written by accused No. 1 and signed by accused No. 2 stating therein:
"Repaired Motor with our replacing statore or Rotor" and thereby dishonestly induced the Central Excise Inspector to allow the clearance of Electric Motor Nos. 614193, 614194, 614196 respectively without payment of Central Excise duty on the dutiable parts namely Rotors Nos. 41-40-42 which were manufactured by M/s. Jyoti Ltd. Company, Baroda and were replaced by the said company in the above Electric Motors and thereby got the clearance of the above Electric Motors without payment of Central Excise Duty, causing thereby wrongful loss of Rs. 11,450 to the Central Excise Department and thereby both of you committed offence punishable under S. 420 read with 34 of I.P.C. within cognizance of J.M.F.C., Baroda.
And also that both of you at about the same time and place in furtherance of common intention in your capacity as employees of M/s. Jyoti Ltd, Baroda willfully and with an intention to defraud the Central Excise Department, Baroda made false entries in the gatepasses as mentioned above belonging to your employer and thereby committed an offence punishable under S. 477-A read with S.34 I.P.C. and within cognizance J.M.F.C., Baroda. And thereby direct that you both be tried for the above offences by 2nd Court, J.M.F.C., Baroda".
2. The learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Baroda who tried the case acquitted both the accused of the charge under S.420 read with S.34, I.P.C. but convicted them under S. 477-A read with S.34, I.P.C. and sentenced them to pay fines of Rs. 100 and Rs. 500 respectively. The learned Magistrate was of the view that neither of the accused intended to cheat and make wrongful gain but that they made a false entry in the gatepasses with a view to help their employer. The two accused preferred an appeal to the Extra Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda. The learned Sessions Judge acquitted them of the charge under S.477-A read with S.34, I.P.C. also. The learned Sessions Judge found that the gate passes were prepared by the accused under a mistake and that the worst that could be said against the two accused was that they acted inadvertently or negligently. The learned Sessions Judge took the view that the expression "intend to defraud" denoted some element of dishonesty and that the appellants acted neither willfully nor with the intent to defraud the Government. The State of Gujarat filed two appeals, the first against the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Judicial First Class Magistrate, Baroda on the charge under S. 420 read with S.34, I.P.C. and the second against the order of acquittal recorded by the learned Extra Additional Sessions Judge, Baroda on the charge under S.477-A read with S.34, I.P.C. The appeal against the order of acquittal on the charge under S. 477-A read with S.34, I.P.C. was dismissed summarily on 13-3-72 by J.M.Sheth and A.A.Dave, JJ. The appeal against the order of acquittal on the charge under S.420 read with S. 34, I.P.C. was allowed on 27/28-2-73 by J. M. Sheth, J. and the two accused were sentenced to pay fines of Rs. 300 and 500 respectively. It is against this judgment of J.M. Sheth, J. that the present appeal has been preferred by special leave to this Court.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.