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

2025 Supreme(Ker) 2944

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
A. BADHARUDEEN, J.
Kailash Gupta, S/o.Late Sreelal Gupta and Ors. - Appellants
Versus
Superintendent Of Police SPE/CBI, Kochi, Through The Standing Counsel For, CBI, High Court Of Kerala, Ernakulam – Respondent
CRL.A No. 2340 of 2006
Decided On : 10-11-2025

Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellants : Shri. A. Mohammed, Shri. Ashik K. Mohamed Ali, Shri. Muhammed Rifa P.M., Smt. Ehlas Haleema C.K., Shri.Salman Faris, Smt. Gayathri Ashish Nair.
For the Respondents: Public Prosecutor, Shri. Sreelal N. Warrier - Spl.Public Prosecutor, Central Bureau Of Investigation (CBI).

Conviction under sections 120B and 420 of IPC requires proof of dishonest intent at inception, established through submitted forged documents resulting in bank fraud.

Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 374(2) - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 - Section 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) - Indian Penal Code - Sections 120B and 420 - Criminal conspiracy and cheating involving bank transactions - Conviction and sentence imposed on accused for submitting forged documents to discount bills for pay-outs from the bank, resulting in financial loss. (Paras 5, 11, 37, 39)

(B) Fraudulent inducement - For conviction under IPC Section 420, it’s essential to establish dishonest intention at the inception. (Paras 30, 39)

Facts of the case:
Appellants, managing partners of a firm, were convicted for conspiring to cheat a bank by using forged documents to obtain funds. The original manager, also accused, acquitted for lack of evidence. (Paras 5, 11)

Findings of Court:
The Special Court confirmed the conviction while modifying the sentence for one appellant due to death. The second appellant’s sentence was reduced considering prior detention. (Paras 40, 41, 42)

Issues: The judgment addressed if the lower court accurately found conspiracy and cheating under IPC and whether the sentence imposed was appropriate. (Paras 11-12)

Ratio Decidendi: Court upheld the belief that absence of bank names in documents indicated fraudulent intention, solidifying the basis for conspiracy charges. Modification of sentence considered overall circumstances and the payment settlement made by appellants. (Paras 37-39, 40)

Result: Appeals partially allowed; conviction confirmed with modified sentences.

Table of Content
1. challenge to conviction and continuation of appeal. (Para 1 , 2)
2. allegations of conspiracy and cheating. (Para 5 , 8)
3. evidence and procedures in trial. (Para 6 , 11 , 12)
4. definitions and elements of cheating and conspiracy. (Para 30 , 33)
5. analysis of evidence for fraudulent intent. (Para 34 , 37 , 38)
6. modification of sentence and confirmation of conviction. (Para 40 , 41 , 42 , 43)

JUDGMENT :

A. BADHARUDEEN, J.

Accused Nos.2 and 3 in C.C. No.2/2002 on the files of the Court of the Special Judge (SPE/CBI)-I, Ernakulam, have filed this appeal, under Section 374 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [hereinafter referred as ‘Cr.P.C.’ for short], challenging the conviction and sentence imposed by the Special Judge, against them as per the judgment dated 30.11.2006. The Superintendent of Police, Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), Kochi, represented by the Special Public Prosecutor is arrayed as the sole respondent herein.

2. During the pendency of this appeal, the 1st appellant/2nd accused died and the wife of the 1st appellant got impleaded as the additional 3rd appellant to continue with this appeal.

3. Heard the learned counsel for the appellants and the learned Special Public Prosecutor, in detail. Perused the verdict under challenge, the records of the Special Court as well as the decision placed by the learned counsel for the appellants.

4. Parties in this appeal shall be referred as ‘accused’ and ‘prosecution’, hereafter.

5. In this matter, the prosecution case is that, the1st accused functioned as Manager, Allahabad Bank, Mattancherry Branch, Kochi, during the period between January, 1996 and June, 1998. The 2nd accused was the Managing Partner and the 3rd accused, who is the son of the 2nd accused, was the Partner of M/s.KVA Brothers, Mattancherry. They had been doing business relating to the trading of dried coconut for producing coconut oil at the factory of the 4th accused known as ‘Jyothi Agro Industries, Akhola’, in Maharashtra State. The 4th accused was the proprietor of M/s.Jyothi Agro Industries, Akhola. The case of the prosecution is that, accused Nos.1 to 4 hatched criminal conspiracy during the year 1997 at Mattancherry, Kochi and Akhola, Maharashtra and also other places for cheating Allahabad Bank, Mattancherry Branch, Kochi and criminal misconduct was done by the 1st accused in the matter of discounting of bills for obtaining undue pecuniary advantage to accused Nos.2 to 4. In pursuance of the criminal conspiracy, accused Nos.2 and 3 submitted 13 numbers of IBDs (Inland Bill Discounted) during the period between 11.3.1997 and 9.6.1997 for discounting before the 1st accused showing sale of Copra to the 4th accused. Further, in pursuance of the said conspiracy, accused Nos.2 and 3 submitted stale LRs along with the bills showing the consignee as Allahabad Bank after getting the LRs from the transporter without specifying the consignee Bank's name. Further, accused Nos.2 and 3 in pursuance of the conspiracy filed forged invalid open insurance forms along with the said 13 bills in order to make it appear that the said consignments were insured. The 1st accused, in pursuance of the conspiracy by abusing his official position as a public servant, by corrupt or illegal means discounted the said 13 bills totally disregarding the fact that the limit sanctioned under the IBD to M/s.KVA Brothers was already overdrawn and substantial amount was outstanding in the loan account. Further, the 1st accused dishonestly accepted those 13 bills irrespective of the fact that the LRs were stale and as such, he was not allowed such stale LRs. In pursuance of the said conspiracy, accused Nos.2 and 3, after discounting the bills, and on some occasions, even prior to the discounting sent the consignment directly to the 4th accused at Akola in order facilitate him to take delivery of the consignment without making payments against the discounted bills. In pursuance of the conspiracy, the 4th accused took

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