JUDGMENT:

The revision petitioner was found guilty for the offences under Section 24(1) (b) of Emigration Act, 1983 and 420 of Indian Penal Code and was convicted by the trial Court in C.C.No.339 of 2011, dated 28.09.2012. The said conviction was questioned before the Sessions Court by filling an appeal i.e., Crl.A.No.986 of 2012. The Sessions Court dismissed the appeal and confirmed the conviction and sentence imposed by the trial Court. Aggrieved by the said confirmation of conviction and sentence, the present revision is filed.

2. Heard learned counsel for the revision petitioner, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondent/State and perused the record.

3. Briefly, the case of the prosecution is that the revision petitioner was found to be running business in the name of New Gulf Travel Agency situated at Ashok Plaza, near Golconda Hotel, Masab Tank, Hyderabad, without any valid license from the concerned authorities. Since 3 years he was sending man power abroad through his agent at Mumbai by giving advertisements in local newspapers.

4. According to the prosecution, when the candidates approaches the accused, he was collecting their passports, bio-data, educational and other experience certificates from them and sending the same to his agent at Mumbai for the purpose of Visa processing and thus cheated the public by collecting the amounts from them. PW3/defacto-complainant, who is the police officer, went to the premises along with other police personnel and conducted the search in the premises. During the search, passports, bio-data, educational certificates and other experience certificates of different persons were found in the premises. Besides various certificates found in the accused premises and running travel agency without any valid license, PW3 lodged a complaint against the accused. Based on the documents collected at the premises, the trial Court found that PW3 along with other police personnel conducted search at the premises and found Exs.P10 to P23 which are bio-data of different persons. On the basis of other documents also the trial Court concluded that the accused violated the provisions of Emigration Act, 1983 and committed cheating. The said conviction by the trial Court was also confirmed in the sessions Court.

5. Learned counsel appearing for the revision petitioner would submit that PWs.1 and 2 have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. Furthermore, none of the victims were examined by the prosecution. In the absence of any victims being examined the question of cheating does not arise. Learned counsel further argued that seizure of documents from the premises does not imply that the accused violated the Emigration Act, 1983 and was running business without any valid license.

6. The search conducted by PW3 cannot be suspected only for the reason that PWs.1 and 2, who are independent witnesses have turned hostile and did not support the prosecution case. In fact the bio-data of different persons were found at the premises and no reason is given by the accused regarding the documents found at the premises. In fact Ex.P27 is a letter addressed to Protector of Emigrants and the reply received is Ex.P28, in the said reply it was informed that the accused was not authorized to recruit or send any persons to aboard. Accordingly the trial Court found that the accused was running the travel agency without obtaining any valid license from the concerned authorities and sending man power to abroad by collecting money from them.

7. The documents found at the scene clearly indicate that the accused was running the travel agency and was in the process of securing Visas to the persons, who approaches him, however, no single person involved in this process was examined. Therefore, it cannot be stated that the accused was involved in cheating anyone. Accordingly the conviction under Section 420 of IPC is set aside.

8. However, the accused did not dispute regarding the running of the travel a