Important Point
For offence u\s 409, 467 and 471, the existence of mens rea (guilty mind must be proved.
For an offence under Section 409 it must be proved that person entrusted with property, or any dominion over property in his capacity as a public servant committed criminal breach of trust in respect of such property as defined in Section 405, I.P.C.

Headnote:Indian Penal Court, 1860 – Sections 409,468,471,477-A,120-B – Prevention of corruption Act, 1988 – Section 13(1)(c) r\w 13(2) – Prosecution of accused persons public servants ten in number for encashing T.A. Bills for an amount of Rs. 51,24,500\- amount funded for Indian population project, idukki on basis of fake allotment letters, preparing acquittal rolls and making false entries in books and receipt and for misappropriating a sum of Rs. 50,07,405 – High Court while convicting A4 to A7 u\ 13(1)(c) r\w 13(2) of PC Act set aside their convictions u\s 409, 468, 471,477-A and 120 –B IPC – Appeals there against by accused persons on one hand and state on another - For offence u\s 409, 467 and 471, the existence of mens rea (guilty mind) must be proved – So far with regard to offence u\s 467, I.P.C. was concerned, there was no evidence to show that appellants forged a document which purported to be a valuable security - No evidence that appellants had knowledge of fact that allotment letter was a forged letter - No evidence that A-4 to A-7 dishonestly misappropriated or converted to their own use amount of T.A – Evidence on record established that A-4 to A-7 were not beneficiaries of misappropriated amount - Absence of any evidence to show that A-4 to A-7 were acting in conspiracy with A-1, A-2, A-8, A-9 and A-10 and that A-4 to A-7 fraudulently and dishonestly prepared forged bill on basis of forged allotment letter - Offences under Sections 467, 471, 477-A or Section 409 were not proved against appellants - Consequently, offence under provision of Prevention of Corruption Act was also not made out - Trial court was, hence held not justified to convict A-4 to A-7 under aforesaid sections of law - Appeals filed by Accused Nos. 4 to 7 allowed - Conviction recorded and sentence imposed upon A-4 to A-7 by Trial Court and confirmed by High Court under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) set aside. (Paras 16 to 19)
       Findings of the Court :
       Accused persons public servants ten in number were prosecuted herein in the instant case for encashing T.A. Bills for an amount of Rs. 51,24,500\- amount funded for Indian population project, idukki on basis of fake allotment letters, preparing acquittal rolls and making false entries in books and receipt and for misappropriating a sum of Rs. 50,07,405. High Court while convicting A4 to A7 u\ 13(1)(c) r\w 13(2) of PC Act set aside their convictions u\s 409, 468, 471,477-A and 120 –B IPC.
       Present appeals against said order of High Court have been filed by accused persons on one hand and state on another.
       Findings of the Court :
       The Court held that so far with regard to offence u\s 467, I.P.C. was concerned, there was no evidence to show that appellants forged a document which purported to be a valuable security. There was no evidence that appellants had knowledge of fact that allotment letter was a forged letter. Again there was no evidence that A-4 to A-7 dishonestly misappropriated or converted to their own use amount of T.A. Evidence on record established that A-4 to A-7 were not beneficiaries of misappropriated amount. There was absence of any evidence to show that A-4 to A-7 were acting in conspiracy with A-1, A-2, A-8, A-9 and A-10 and that A-4 to A-7 fraudulently and dishonestly prepared forged bill on basis of forged allotment letter. Offences under Sections 467, 471, 477-A or Section 409 were not proved against appellants. Consequently, offence under provision of Prevention of Corruption Act was also not made out. Trial court was, hence held not justified to convict A-4 to A-7 under aforesaid sections of law. Appeals filed by Accused Nos. 4 to 7 were allowed. Conviction recorded and sentence imposed upon A-4 to A-7 by Trial Court and confirmed by High Court under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) was set aside.
       Result : Appeal filed by A4 to A7 allowed, appeal filed by State dismissed.

JUDGMENT

H.K.SEMA, J.—

1.Leave granted.

2.These Appeals are directed against the judgment and order dated 10th August, 2005 by the High Court of Kerala in Criminal Appeals. The Appeals arising out of SLP(Crl.) Nos. 5705/2005, 5744/2005 and 5858/2005 are preferred by accused Nos. 4 to 7. The Appeals arising out of SLP(Crl.) Nos. 4683/2006, 4687/2006 and 4684/2006 are preferred by the State.

3.Accused Nos. 1 to 10 were charged with the offence under Sections 409, 468, 471, 477-A and 120-B, Indian Penal Code. The accused were also charged under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short ‘the Act’). They were convicted by the Trial Court and Appeals were confirmed by the High Court. The allegation against them are that they have encashed the T.A. Bills for an amount of Rs.51,24,500/-, the amount funded for the Indian Population Project (I.P.P.), Idukki on the basis of fake allotment letters, preparing false acquittal rolls and made false entries in the books and receipts and misappropriated a sum of Rs.50,07,405/- and in furtherance to the criminal conspiracy with the dishonest intentions, fraudulently misappropriated the said sum and thereby committed criminal breach of trust, falsification of acts of forgery for the purpose of cheating and knowingly used forged documents as genuine and thereby committed the offence punishable under the aforesaid sections.

4.At the relevant time, A-1 was working as Medical Officer at the Primary Health Centre, Chithirapuram. A-2 was Head Clerk. A-3 (deceased) was working as Health Inspector. A-4 and A-5 were working as Sub Treasury Officer, Devikulam. A-6 was working as Junior Superintendent. A-7 was working as Junior Accountant. A-8 was working as L.D. Clerk at the Primary Health Centre, Chithirapuram. A-9 was working as U.D. Clerk in I.P.P., Idukki and A-10 (since deceased) was working as Project Officer, I.P.P., Idukki.

5.At this stage, it will be relevant to mention that A-1 Medical Officer and A-10 Project Officer committed suicide during the trial. A-3 expired prior to the trial. This Court dismissed the appeal of A-2, who was working as Head Clerk. A-8 was working as L.D. Clerk at the Primary Health Centre, Chithirapuram. This Court also dismissed the Appeal of A-9 who was working as U.D. Clerk in I.P.P., Idukki.

6.By the impugned order, the High Court convicted A-4 to A-7 under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) of the Act and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for two years each and pay a fine of Rs. 50,000/- each, if default in payment of fine, they were directed to undergo Simple Imprisonment for a period of six months each. The High Court found A-4 to A-7 not guilty under Section 409, 468, 471, 477-A and 120-B, I.P.C. and accordingly their convictions under aforesaid Sections of law were set aside.

7.While issuing a notice on 28.11.2005, this Court also issued notice as to why A-4 to A-7 should not be convicted under Section 409, 468, 471, 477-A and 120-B, I.P.C., apart from conviction under Section 13(1)(c) read with Section 13(2) of the Act. The accused were also admitted to bail on their executing a bond of Rs.10,000/- each in the like amount with two solvent sureties to the satisfaction of the Trial Court. All the accused are on bail.

8.We have heard the learned counsels appearing on behalf of the parties at great length.

9.Section 409 deals with criminal breach of trust by public servants. Section 468 deals with forgery for the purpose of cheating. Section 471 deals with using forged documents as genuine. Section 477-A deals with falsification of accounts and Section 120-B deals with punishment for criminal conspiracy.

10.The principal contention of the learned counsel for the appellants is that there is no iota of evidence against the accused for the offences under the aforesaid sections of law. In other words, it is urged that none of ingredients of the aforesaid sections of law are established against the accused by the prosecution and, th

Click Here to Read the rest of this document