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

1982 Supreme(Raj) 225

RAJASTHAN HIGH COURT
P.D.Kudal, N.M.Kasliwal, JJ.
Dharam Deo Agarwal & Anr. - Appellants
Versus
State of Rajasthan - Respondent
S.B. Criminal Appeal No. 788 of 1972.
Decided On : 18-01-1982

The court held that the accused persons were guilty of offences under Sections 420 and 120-B/420 IPC based on the evidence that they had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Bank of India by pledging goods in less quantity and over-valuing the goods.

Headnote:

CRIMINAL APPEAL - Enhancement of Sentence - Cheating - Conspiracy - Section 420, 120-B IPC - State Bank of India - Cash Credit Account - Pledged Goods - Physical Verification - Shortage - Liability of Godown-keeper - Conduct of Accused - Explanation - Reasonable Doubt - Relieving Certificate - Duty of Godown-keeper - Conspiracy - Sentence - Enhancement.

Fact of the Case:

The accused persons, Gurbachan Singh, Mohanjit Singh, Dharam Dev Agarwal, and Ramesh Chandra, were tried for offences under Sections 120-B and 420 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The accused were convicted and sentenced by the trial court. The State of Rajasthan filed a revision petition for enhancement of the sentences of Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh. Dharam Dev Agarwal filed an appeal against his conviction and sentence. Ramesh Chandra was acquitted by the trial court.

Finding of the Court:

The court found that the accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Bank of India by pledging goods in less quantity and over-valuing the goods. The court also found that the godown-keeper, Dharam Dev Agarwal, was in conspiracy with the accused persons and had accepted a bribe of Rs. 600/-. The court held that the accused persons were guilty of offences under Sections 420 and 120-B/420 IPC.

Issues: 1. Whether the accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Bank of India? 2. Whether the godown-keeper, Dharam Dev Agarwal, was in conspiracy with the accused persons? 3. Whether the accused persons were guilty of offences under Sections 420 and 120-B/420 IPC?

Ratio Decidendi: 1. The court held that the accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Bank of India based on the following evidence: - The accused persons had pledged goods in less quantity than the quantity mentioned in the pledge letters. - The accused persons had over-valued the goods pledged. - The godown-keeper, Dharam Dev Agarwal, had issued certificates certifying the correctness of the quantity, quality, and description of the goods pledged, even though he knew that the goods were not of the quantity and quality mentioned in the pledge letters. - The accused persons had admitted to the shortage in the goods and had executed a delivery order to meet the shortage. 2. The court held that the godown-keeper, Dharam Dev Agarwal, was in conspiracy with the accused persons based on the following evidence: - The accused persons had issued a cheque for Rs. 600/- in the name of Dharam Dev Agarwal. - The accused persons had admitted to giving the cheque to Dharam Dev Agarwal. - Dharam Dev Agarwal had accepted the cheque and had not returned it to the accused persons. 3. The court held that the accused persons were guilty of offences under Sections 420 and 120-B/420 IPC based on the following evidence: - The accused persons had entered into a criminal conspiracy to cheat the State Bank of India. - The accused persons had cheated the State Bank of India by pledging goods in less quantity and over-valuing the goods. - The accused persons had caused a loss of Rs. 1,45,774.47 paise to the State Bank of India.

Final Decision: The court allowed the revision petition filed by the State of Rajasthan and enhanced the sentences of Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh from rising of the court to six months rigorous imprisonment on both the counts separately, i.e., under Sections 420 as well as 120-B/420 IPC. The court dismissed the appeal filed by Dharam Dev Agarwal.

JUDGMENT

1. - As all the three above cases arise out of a common judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge Jaipur City, dated 4th November, 1972, in Sessions Case No. 29/71 we are also disposing of all the above cases by one common judgment.

2. Gurbachan Singh, Mohanjit Singh, Dharam Dev Agarwal and Ramesh Chandra were tried for offences under Section 120-B and 420 IPC. The learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted accused Ramesh Chandra. He convicted and sentenced the other three accused persons in the following manner :

1. Gurbachan Singh - u/s 120-B/420 & 420 IPC, sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court and a fine of Rs. 2,500/- on each count and in default of payment of fine one year's rigorous imprisonment on each count.

2. Mohanjit Singh- u/s 120-B & 420 IPC, sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the Court and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- on each count, in default of payment of fine six months rigorous imprisonment on each count.

3. Dharam Dev Agarwal- u/s 120-B & 420 IPC-sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment on each count and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- on each count and n default of payment of fine further rigorours imprisonment for six months on tach count.

3. Criminal Revision No 127/1973- by State of Rajasthan has been filed against accused Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh for the enhancement of the sentences. Criminal Appeal No. 735/1972 has been filed by accused Dharam Dev Agarwal against his convictions and sentences and Criminal Appeal No. 788/1972 as been filed by Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh against their convictions and sentences passed by the trial Court.

4. Shortly stated the prosecution case is that Gurbachan Singh was the proprietor and his son Mohanjit Singh was the manager of Messrs. Gandhi Industries which was dealing in wool and woollen felts and had its branch office at Jaipur. Accused Dharam Dev Agarwal was the godown-keeper in the State Bank of India, Jaipur from 17th October, 1959 to 4th November, 1961 and accused Ramesh Chandra, who took charge from Dharam Dev Agarwal remained as Godown-keeper upto 5th December, 1962. At the request of Messrs. Gandhi Industries the State Bank of India, Jaipur Branch initially granted a cash credit limit of Rs. 10,000/- upon the security of the goods pledged on 17th October, 1959. This cash credit limit was increased from time to time and was Rs. 1,80,000/- on 5th February, 1962. According to the agreement between Gandhi Industries and the Bank, the limit of advances under this cash credit account was not to exceed 60 percent of the value of the goods so pledged. The case of the prosecution is that accused Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh entered into a criminal conspiracy with the other two accused persons who were godown-keepers of the Bank between 17th October, 1959 and 5th December, 1962 to commit or cause to be committed the offences a of cheating by inducing the bank on false and fraudulent representation of facts to grant or advance withdrawals of more amounts than amounts which Messrs. Gandhi I Industries had otherwise been eligible, if the Bank had not been so cheated by falsely exaggerating the quantum of goods i. e. pledging goods in less quantity than quantity as mentioned in the pledged letters and over-valuing the goods i.e. by mentioning different and inferior quality of goods of less value than mentioned in the pledged letters. Both the Godown keepers also made entries of false quantity and less value of wool and woollen felts in the stock ledgers and godown inspection registers and issued wrong certificates, certifying the correctness of the quantity, quality and description of value of the wool and woollen felts. The bank was thui cheated to the tune of Rs. 1,45,774.47 paise. In December, 1962, the Bank found that the stocks of Messrs. Gandhi Industries had accumulated and their pledged stocks were not moving. On a detailed inspection conducted by the branch authorities, a huge shortage both of wool and woollen felts was de































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