The need for corroboration of the testimony of an accomplice in a conspiracy, as per Section 114 of the Indian Evidence Act, was a central legal principle in this judgment.

Surjit Singh, J.—The appellants are aggrieved by the judgment dated 23.4.1999, of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Solan, camp at Nalagarh, whereby they have been convicted of the offence, under Section 420 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 25,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a further period of six months.

2. Facts that have led to the prosecution, the conviction and the sentencing of the appellants, may be noticed. One Veer Prakash runs a goldsmith shop at Nalagarh in Solan District, Appellant Prakash Chand and Baldev Kumar are also residents of Nalagarh area. They earn their living as fortune tellers. Some time in July, 1994 they allegedly went to said Veer Prakash, goldsmith, whom they had been knowing from before and after reading his palm and horoscope, told him that he was likely to make huge monetary gains in near future. They also told him that some persons from Bengal were likely to visit the area in a month or so and those persons knew magic of increasing currency notes. In August or September, 1994 appellant Kamal Bodhik and one Chander Shekhar (now a proclaimed offender) came to Nalagarh area. They were introduced to Veer Prakash by appellant Prakash Chand and Baldev Kumar. All the four persuaded Veer Prakash that if he paid Rs. 5,00,000/-, he would be given Rs. 7.5 lacs in lieu thereof after some time. In December, 1994 Veer Prakash gave Rs. 5,00,000/- to appellant Kamal Bodhik and proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar in the presence of other two appellants. Veer Prakash had borrowed the money from his relatives and friends. The payment was made in the presence of Sewa Singh (PW-2), one Aslam and one Nathu Appellants Kamal Bodhik and proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar told Veer Prakash that he would be paid Rs. 7.5 lacs after some time. Appellant Kamal Bodhik and the said proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar then left for Calcutta along with the money. In January, 1995 appellant Prakash Chand told Veer Prakash that he had gone to Calcutta to get his money along with the increase of 50%, but due to rush of work, the money could not be multiplied. In February, 1995 Veer Prakash, accompanied by Prakash Chand, himself went to Calcutta. Appellant Kamal Bodhik and the said proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar are alleged to have told him (Veer Prakash) that they would be visiting Nalagarh after about two months and would pay the money to him. On 6th March, 1995 Veer Prakash got drafted a complaint from an Advocate, practising at Nalagarh and submitted the same to the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate Nalagarh, who forwarded it to the Station House Officer, Police Station, Nalagarh, on the basis of which an FIR was registered.

3. After investigation, challan was filed against the present appellants, proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar and some more persons. The other persons, who were challaned along with the appellants and the proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar, were discharged with the reasoning that they were, in fact, the victims of the crime and not the perpetrators. The present appellants and the proclaimed offender Chander Shekhar were, however, charged with offences, under Sections 489-A, 489-D, 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code.

4. During the course of trial, Chander Shekhar absented. He was declared a proclaimed offender. The present three appellants, on the conclusion of the trial, were held guilty of the offence, under Section 420 read with Section 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and convicted and sentenced as aforesaid.

5. Appellants are aggrieved by the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge. Their contention is that their plea that they had received only Rs. 2,00,000/- from Veer Prakash and that too on account of part payment of jewels and stones, which they had sold to him, has been rejected by the learned Additional Ses