advocatemmmohan

My photo

ADVOCATEMMMOHAN -  Practicing both IN CIVIL, CRIMINAL AND FAMILY LAWS,Etc.,

WELCOME TO LEGAL WORLD

WELCOME TO MY LEGAL WORLD - FOR KNOWLEDGE IN LAW & FOR LEGAL OPINIONS - SHARE THIS

Friday, September 5, 2014

Modification of sentence - Sec.420 I.P.C. - Public servant gave false certificate as landless poor for obtaining land from Govt. - trial court convicted both accused under sec.420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC - Appeal court convicted under sec.420 and sec.177 - High court confirm the same - Apex court held that The essential ingredients to attract Section 420 IPC are : (i) cheating; (ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or to make, alter or destroy any valuable security or anything which is sealed or is capable of being converted into a valuable security and (iii) mens rea of the accused at the time of making the inducement. There is no evidence to show that there was such fraudulent dishonest intention on the part of the appellant in issuing certificate in favour of Lal Chand. Issuance of false certificate cannot be said to be with dishonest intention to make wrongful gain for himself. Since the ingredients of Section 420 IPC are not proved, the conviction of the appellant under Section 420 IPC, cannot be sustained and the same is set aside. For conviction under Section 177 IPC, the appellate court has awarded the sentence of imprisonment of six months which was confirmed by the High Court. It was submitted that allotment of land to Lal Chand was also cancelled, which, in our view has to be taken into consideration while considering the question of sentence imposed on the appellant. The appellant is said to have already undergone the sentence for a period of 51/2 months. For the conviction under Section 177 IPC, the sentence of imprisonment imposed on the appellant is modified to the period already undergone. = CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 1837 OF 2014 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2331/2014) BISHAN DAS .. Appellant Versus STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR. ..Respondents = 2014 Aug. Part - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41848

Modification of sentence - Sec.420 I.P.C. - Public servant gave false certificate as landless poor for obtaining land from Govt. - trial court convicted both accused under sec.420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC - Appeal court convicted under sec.420 and sec.177 - High court confirm the same - Apex court held that The essential ingredients to  attract  Section  420   IPC  are  : 
 (i) cheating; (ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or  to  make,  alter or destroy any valuable security or anything which is sealed or  is  capable of being converted into a valuable  security  and  (iii)  mens  rea  of  the accused at the time of making the inducement.       
There is no evidence  to show that there was such fraudulent dishonest intention on the part  of  the appellant in issuing certificate in favour of Lal Chand.   Issuance of  false certificate cannot be said to be with dishonest intention to  make  wrongful gain for himself.    Since the  ingredients  of  Section  420  IPC  are  not proved, the conviction of the appellant  under Section 420  IPC,  cannot  be sustained and the same is set aside. For conviction under Section 177  IPC, the appellate  court  has awarded the sentence of imprisonment of six months  which was  confirmed  by the High Court.  It was submitted that allotment of land to  Lal  Chand   was
also cancelled, which, in our  view  has  to  be  taken  into  consideration while considering the question of  sentence imposed on the  appellant.   The appellant is said to have  already undergone  the sentence  for a period  of 51/2 months.   For the conviction under Section 177  IPC,  the  sentence  of imprisonment  imposed on the appellant  is modified to  the  period  already
undergone.   =

The charge against the  appellant   is
that the appellant  had knowingly  issued a false certificate  in favour  of
Lal Chand  that he did not own  any property except the land  which  he  had
made fit for cultivation,  though Lal Chand  had owned  13   kanals  and  13
marlas of land  situated in village Baruhi  and his wife   owned  70  kanals
of land in village Baruhi.   Based on the said false certificate  pretending
to be the landless person, Lal Chand   sought allotment of land  and on  the
basis of the certificate, land was allotted to  Lal  Chand.   The  appellant
along with the co-accused  Lal Chand was  charged  for  the  offences  under
Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and the trial court  convicted
the appellant  for the aforesaid  offences  and  imposed  various  sentences
inter alia two years rigorous imprisonment for  the  offence  under  Section
420 IPC.=
In the appeal,  the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur,  set  aside  the
conviction  of the appellant  under Sections 465, 467,  468,  471  and  120B
IPC  but convicted the appellant for the offences  under  Sections  420  and
177 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one  year  and
six months respectively and  ordered  them  to  run  concurrently.  =
In so far as the conviction of the appellant under  Section  420
IPC,  is concerned,  the appellate  court  convicted  the  appellant   under
Section  420  IPC, on the finding that the appellant issued the  certificate
in favour of  Lal Chand  with dishonest  intention of getting  allotment  of
land  for the said  Lal Chand and by getting  the allotment,  the  same  was
also  achieved.
9.    The essential ingredients to  attract  Section  420   IPC  are  :
 (i) cheating; 
(ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or  to  make,  alter
or destroy any valuable security or anything which is sealed or  is  capable
of being converted into a valuable  security  and  
(iii)  mens  rea  of  the
accused at the time of making the inducement.      
There is no evidence  to
show that there was such fraudulent dishonest intention on the part  of  the
appellant in issuing certificate in favour of Lal Chand.  
Issuance of  false
certificate cannot be said to be with dishonest intention to  make  wrongful
gain for himself.    
Since the  ingredients  of  Section  420  IPC  are  not
proved, the conviction of the appellant  under Section 420  IPC,  cannot  be
sustained and the same is set aside.
10.         For conviction under Section 177  IPC, the appellate  court  has
awarded the sentence of imprisonment of six months  which was  confirmed  by
the High Court.
It was submitted that allotment of land to  Lal  Chand   was
also cancelled, which, in our  view  has  to  be  taken  into  consideration
while considering the question of  sentence imposed on the  appellant.   The
appellant is said to have  already undergone  the sentence  for a period  of
51/2 months.  
For the conviction under Section 177  IPC,  the  sentence  of
imprisonment  imposed on the appellant  is modified to  the  period  already
undergone.  
The  appellant  is  on  bail,  his  bail  bonds   shall   stand
discharged.   The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

2014 Aug. Part - http://judis.nic.in/supremecourt/filename=41848

                                                        Non-Reportable


                        IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
                       CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

                 CRIMINAL APPEAL NO.     1837       OF 2014
                (Arising  out of S.L.P. (Crl.) No. 2331/2014)



BISHAN DAS                                            .. Appellant

                                   Versus

STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR.                          ..Respondents




                                  O R D E R



R. BANUMATHI, J.



            Leave granted.
2.          This appeal is preferred against  the  judgment  of  Punjab  and
Haryana High  Court   dated  18.12.2013  passed  in  Criminal  Revision  No.
3982/2013  confirming the conviction of the  appellant  under  Sections  420
and 177  IPC  as ordered by the Appellate Court.
3.          The case of the prosecution in brief is that the  appellant  was
Sarpanch of  Gram Panchayat, Baurhi.  The charge against the  appellant   is
that the appellant  had knowingly  issued a false certificate  in favour  of
Lal Chand  that he did not own  any property except the land  which  he  had
made fit for cultivation,  though Lal Chand  had owned  13   kanals  and  13
marlas of land  situated in village Baruhi  and his wife   owned  70  kanals
of land in village Baruhi.   Based on the said false certificate  pretending
to be the landless person, Lal Chand   sought allotment of land  and on  the
basis of the certificate, land was allotted to  Lal  Chand.   The  appellant
along with the co-accused  Lal Chand was  charged  for  the  offences  under
Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC and the trial court  convicted
the appellant  for the aforesaid  offences  and  imposed  various  sentences
inter alia two years rigorous imprisonment for  the  offence  under  Section
420 IPC.
4.    In the appeal,  the Addl. Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur,  set  aside  the
conviction  of the appellant  under Sections 465, 467,  468,  471  and  120B
IPC  but convicted the appellant for the offences  under  Sections  420  and
177 IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment of one  year  and
six months respectively and  ordered  them  to  run  concurrently.   In  the
revision preferred before the High Court, the High Court   has   upheld  the
conviction and sentence of the appellant as aforesaid.
5.          We have heard the learned counsel for the  parties.   The  point
falling for consideration is whether the  conviction  and  sentence  of  the
appellant  under Sections 420 and 177 IPC    is sustainable.
6.          Section 177 IPC deals with giving  of  false  information.   The
ingredients of Section 177 IPC are :-

(i)   That a person must be  legally  bound  to  furnish  information  on  a
particular subject  to a public  servant.

(ii)  That he must furnish, as true, information on that  subject  which  he
knows or has reason to believe to be false.


7.          The appellant being a Sarpanch of  Gram  Panchayat  was  legally
bound  to  give  correct   information   and  bound  to  issue   a   correct
certificate. Though Lal Chand  owned 13 kanals 13 marlas and his wife   also
owned lands in village Baruhi, the appellant  issued  false  certificate  in
favour of Lal Chand  that  he  does  not  own  any  land   except  the  land
which he has made fit for cultivation and  thus  furnished  the  information
which he knew to be false.   Based on the revenue records, the  trial  court
recorded factual findings that Lal Chand and  his  wife   totally  owned  83
kanals 14 marlas  of  land.   The  appellant   knowingly  issued  the  false
certificate in favour of Lal Chand  containing false  information   and  the
ingredients of Section 177  IPC  are  proved   and  we  find  no  reason  to
interfere with the conviction of the appellant under Section 177 IPC.
8.          In so far as the conviction of the appellant under  Section  420
IPC,  is concerned,  the appellate  court  convicted  the  appellant   under
Section  420  IPC, on the finding that the appellant issued the  certificate
in favour of  Lal Chand  with dishonest  intention of getting  allotment  of
land  for the said  Lal Chand and by getting  the allotment,  the  same  was
also  achieved.
9.    The essential ingredients to  attract  Section  420   IPC  are  :  (i)
cheating; (ii) dishonest inducement to deliver property or  to  make,  alter
or destroy any valuable security or anything which is sealed or  is  capable
of being converted into a valuable  security  and  (iii)  mens  rea  of  the
accused at the time of making the inducement.       There is no evidence  to
show that there was such fraudulent dishonest intention on the part  of  the
appellant in issuing certificate in favour of Lal Chand.  Issuance of  false
certificate cannot be said to be with dishonest intention to  make  wrongful
gain for himself.    Since the  ingredients  of  Section  420  IPC  are  not
proved, the conviction of the appellant  under Section 420  IPC,  cannot  be
sustained and the same is set aside.
10.         For conviction under Section 177  IPC, the appellate  court  has
awarded the sentence of imprisonment of six months  which was  confirmed  by
the High Court. It was submitted that allotment of land to  Lal  Chand   was
also cancelled, which, in our  view  has  to  be  taken  into  consideration
while considering the question of  sentence imposed on the  appellant.   The
appellant is said to have  already undergone  the sentence  for a period  of
51/2 months.   For the conviction under Section 177  IPC,  the  sentence  of
imprisonment  imposed on the appellant  is modified to  the  period  already
undergone.   The  appellant  is  on  bail,  his  bail  bonds   shall   stand
discharged.   The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.

                                                               ……………………………J.
                                                               (T.S. Thakur)



                                                               ……………………………J.
                                                              (R. Banumathi)


New Delhi,
August 26, 2014



-----------------------
6


No comments:

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.