Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH AT AMARAVATI
B.V.L.N.CHAKRAVARTHI
Konajam Rajasekhar @ Sekhar (A1) Krishna Dt – Appellant
Versus
State Of Andhra Pradesh Rep Pp, Rep., By Public Prosecutor – Respondent
ORDER :
B V L N CHAKRAVARTHI, J.
The Criminal Revision Case is filed by the petitioners/A-1 and A-2 U/secs.397 and 401 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘Cr.P.C.’) to set aside the judgment dated 02.07.2015 passed in C.C.124/2010 on the file of Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Special Mobile Court, Machilipatnam, as confirmed in the judgment dated 10.07.2017 in Crl.A.No.154/2015 on the file of VI Addl. District & Sessions Judge, Machilipatnam.
02. Heard Sri Kailashnath Reddy, learned counsel for the petitioners and Sri P. Somayaji, learned Additional Public Prosecutor representing the State/respondent.
03. The learned counsel for the petitioners would argue that the accused were charged for offence U/s.420 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter referred to as ‘I.P.C.’). The learned trial Court convicted the accused for the offence U/s.420 IPC and sentenced to suffer rigorous imprisonment for a period of two (02) years each and pay fine of Rs.3,000/- (Rupees Three Thousand only) each, in default of payment of fine, accused shall suffer simple imprisonment for a period of six (06) months each.
04. The learned counsel for petitioners would further submit
Conviction for cheating under Section 420 IPC upheld as evidence proved deceitful intent; sentence modified due to age of defendants.
The court upheld the conviction for cheating under Section 420 IPC, affirming the lower courts' findings and modifying the sentence to six months due to mitigating circumstances.
The necessity of proving a promise or deceit made to the victim by the accused for the purpose of attributing Sec. 415 and 420 of the IPC.
High Courts should not interfere with lower court findings in the absence of evidential perversity.
For a conviction under section 420 IPC, clear evidence of deception and dishonest intention is required, which was not established in this case.
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
