LexMADAN LAL RAM CHANDRA DAGA ETC. versus SFATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
MADAN LAL AAM CHANDRA DAGA ETC. v. SfATE OF MAHARASHTRA February 5, 1968 A (M. HIDAYATULLAH, R. S, BACHAWAT AND K. S. HEGDE, JJ.j B Practice and Procedure-Criminal appeti/-Offtnc• o' cheatlng--0/ftr by accused to return 1noney if sentence 'M'OS rtduct!d-Higlt Court willing to consider-Propriety. The three appellants were a partner, munim and clerk of the R. R. firm and were closely related to one another. In the course of their deol- ings with. the J. R. firm, who were Bankers and CoinmisMon Ajents, the appellants were alleged to have, inlla!ed the invoices of goods drawn up exaggerated lmndies, and borrowed money from the J. R. finii on the security of such invoices and hundks. The J. R. firm came to know 1he fact! when the hundios were not honoured; but before the hundies were tendered to the R. R. firm, its partners were declared inlolvenL 'lbe ~ppellants were charged with the offence of cheatinJI the J. R. firm. In the High Court, the partner offered to pay his sbaro of the losses of tbe J. R. firm if the sente11ee passed on him by the trial court was reduced. 1be High Court adjourned the appeal to enable him to deposit the money but did not. reduce the sentence though it recovered the fine imposed from the money. deposited. c D In appeal to this Court it was contended that : (I) there was no evi- dence against the clerk; (2) the High Court should have ,reduced the sm- tence; and (3) the partner and munim would pay to the J. R. firm tbe amounts wrongly realised by them and this Court may reduce the aenteru:e. E HELD : (I) As regards the clerk there was nothing to show that he took prut in the negotiations with the J. R. firm, or that any r-ntation was made by him to that firm, or thaJ he made the inflated invoices and hundies. The only evidence against htm was (a) that he wrote some in- voices which were not inflated, (b) that he took ~ to the J. R. firm, and (c) that he drew ·up some pay-in-slips on behalf of the J. R. firm. In the absence of a charge of conspiracy, the evidenal was not relevant and F the clerk could not be held guilty of the offence of cheating. [38 A-Fl (2) It is very wtong for courts to enter into a barpin with the accused by which money is recovered for the complainant through their agency. Offences should be tried and punished according to the guilt of the accused, and if any leniency is to be shown in the 'sentence it should be on the faots of the case. The High Court should not have agn:ed to consider lhe question of sentence and the offer of the accused in· this Court could ltot also be accep ed. [39 E--GJ ( 3) The sentences were however reduced, because, but for the supu- vening ilsolvency, the ac:Cused ·might have paid back the money as they had done in the past. [39 HJ CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeals Nos. 99 to 104 of 1964. Appeals by special leave from the judgment and order dated March l 0, 1964 of the Bombay High Court in Criminal Appeals G H • A B MADAN LAL v. MAHARASHTRA (Hidayatul/a/1, /.) 35 Nos. 1323 to 1325 of 1962 and 1073 to 1075 of 1962 respec- tively. Nurudclin Ahmed, G. L. Sanghi and 0. C. Marhur, for the appellants (in all the appeals). M. S. K. Sastri and S. P. Nayar, for the respondent (in all the appeals). Purshottam Trikamdas and I. N. Shroff, for the complainants (in all the appeals). The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Hidayatullah, J. . This judgment shall govern the disposal of C Criminal Appeals Nos. 99-104 of 1964. These appeals arise from a number of criminal prosecutions started against four ·persons for cheating. In the original court there were as many as nine cases filed against them which were tried simultaneously, three of the same kind being tried together, as required by the Code of Criminal Procedure. As a result of the trial the lirst D and the fourth accused were acquitted. Accused Nos. 2 and 3 were convicted. They were sentenced in the aggregate to rigorous imprisonment for two years and were imposed fines lotalling Rs. 15,000 each. The convicted accused appealed to the High Court. The State Government also appealed against the acquittal of accused No. 4. The High Court maintained the E ·conviction and sentences qf accused Nos. 2 and· 3 and further set aside the acquittal of accused No. 4 who on conviction was sen- tenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years but no fine was imposed on him. The convicted accused have now filed th
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.