SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

1974 Supreme(Bom) 146

IN THE HIGH COURT OF BOMBAY
V. D. Tulzapurkar, J.
Philip Simon Kallath.... Appellant.
Versus
Rajeshkumar another .... Respondents.
Criminal Appeal No. 987 of 1973, decided on 21-11-1974.
Advocate appeared :
S. Venkateshwaran and G.A. Panna, for Appellant,
Suresh G. Shah, for Complainant.
J.A. Barday, P.P., for State.

In order to establish the offence of cheating under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, the prosecution must prove that the accused made a false representation, that the accused induced the complainant to part with a sum of money, and that the accused cheated the complainant.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - SECTION 420 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE - FALSE REPRESENTATION - INDUCEMENT - CHEATING - INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENTS - DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE - ORAL EVIDENCE - APPRECIATION OF EVIDENCE - CONVICTION SET ASIDE.

Fact of the Case:

The appellant was convicted under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code for cheating the complainant by inducing him to part with a sum of Rs. 98,000 on the false pretext of producing a picture styled as "Asha" and on further representation that actress Saguna and actor Biswajeet were acting in the said film and that the complainant would be taken as an associate producer of the film.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the prosecution failed to establish that the accused had cheated the complainant by making any false representations to him. The court held that the documentary evidence as well as a considerable part of the oral evidence on record supported the accused's version and supported his case.

Issues: 1. Whether the accused had made any false representations to the complainant? 2. Whether the accused had induced the complainant to part with a sum of Rs. 98,000? 3. Whether the accused had cheated the complainant?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the prosecution failed to establish that the accused had made any false representations to the complainant. 2. The court held that the accused had not induced the complainant to part with a sum of Rs. 98,000. 3. The court held that the accused had not cheated the complainant.

Final Decision: The court allowed the appeal and set aside the order of conviction and sentence passed by the lower Court.

JUDGMENT - V. D. TULZAPURKAR, J.:---This appeal has been preferred by one Phillip Simon Kallath (original accused) against his conviction under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code and sentence of six month rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1,000 imposed by him by the learned Presidency Magistrate, 28th Court, Esplanade, Bombay on 23rd July, 1973 in Criminal Case No. 313/P/72.

2. The charge against the appellant---accused was that in the month of May 1970, at Greater Bombay he induced the complainant Rajeshkumar P. Dave to part with a cash of Rs. 98,000 under the false pretext of producing a picture styled as "Asha" and on further representation that actress Saguna and actor Biswajeet were acting in the said film and that the complainant would be taken as an associate producer of the film and thereby the appellant-accused has committed an offence punishable under section 420 of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The prosecution was instituted by the complainant by lodging a complaint dated 25th March, 1971 with the Deputy Commissioner of Police, General Branch, C.I.D. Bombay and the complainants case was that prior to May, 1970 he was residing at Vidhyanagar Anand and was carrying on business of palmistry and astrology there. But from the very beginning he was interested in production of movies, particularly producing a Gujarati movies. His case further was that in the first week of May, 1970 after coming to Bombay he contacted one Devendra Prasad Singh whom he knew for the past about 15 years and to whom during the latters visit at Anand he had told about his ambition to produce a Gujarati picture. Devendra Prasad Singh told him that he (Devendra Prasad Singh) was then engaged as a Director of a certain film inoculated Asha produced by one P.S. Kallath (accused under the banner of Vivia Arts (Madras) and that he would introduce him (complainant) to the accused. Accordingly, Devendra Prasad Singh arranged the meeting between the complainant and the accused at the latters residence near Bandstand at Bandra. During this meeting a general talk took place about the movies and production thereof and Devendra Prasad Singh told the accused about his (complainants) desire and ambition to produce Gujarati picture. There were further meetings at the residence of the accused and according to the complainant, the accused suggested to him that if he was really interested in producing a picture with limited finance he (complainant) should join him as an associate producer in the production of his movie initiated Asha whereupon he enquired of the accused as to how much investment would be required. He further told the accused that he had made arrangements for Rs. 30,000/- and could further arrange for a total amount of Rs. 50,000/-. In yet another meeting which took place on 9th May, 1970 according to the complainant the accused made certain representations which were as follows:---

(a) That the accused was producing film initiated Asha under the banner of Vivia Arts (Madras);

(b) That in that film the accused had taken Biswajeet as hero, Saguna as heroine, Sagunas sister Rani in a character role along with number of other artists;

(c) The accused had taken Shri Jaideo as Music Director and that he had already recorded four songs wherein playback was given by Mohd. Rafi, Lata Mangeshkar and Asha Bhosle;

(d) That the shooting of his film had already started and that all arrangements were to be made to complete the film within three months but further progress was held up for want of finance;

(e) That the accused had already invested Rs. 3 lacs and that his investment would have been much more but the fact that Saguna being his wife and Rani being sister-in law were to work on credit and that the would be paid only after the release of the said picture;

(f) That Biswajeet being his friend had also agreed to work for his film and would receive the balance amount on the release of the picture;

(g) That he was in need of Rs.50,000 and he was unable to arran





























Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Judicial Analysis

AI

SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon Back to top