MAYANK N SHAH versus STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.

Citation: [2019] 15 S.C.R. 358 · Decided: 18-12-2019 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: N.V. RAMANA, R. SUBHASH REDDY · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

cites 2 · see the full citation network in Lexace

Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
358
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2019] 15 S.C.R.
MAYANK N SHAH
v.
STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No. 2298 of 2010)
DECEMBER 18, 2019
[N. V. RAMANA, R. SUBHASH REDDY AND
B. R. GAVAI, JJ.]
Sentence/Sentencing – Complaint lodged against the
appellant-accused no.4 and four others – At the relevant time,
accused no.1 was serving as Branch Manager of Central Bank
of India, Ahmedabad– Accused nos.2, 3 were partners of a
partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacturing crank-
shafts for jeeps, ambassador cars etc.– Appellant was serving as
Chief Manager (Operations) with the firm and accused no.5 was
office Superintendent– Accused no.2 applied to the Bank for
availing loan facilities for the firm – Case of the complainant inter
alia that under the Usance Bills facility, the partnership firm used
to offer its bills drawn on different outstation parties and along
with the said bills they produced railway receipt, motor receipt,
invoices for the value of the goods sold to the parties and also
the hundis drawn upon the purchases – Said documents were
signed by accused nos.2-5– On such presentation, the bank used
to grant credit facility – Allegedly, forged receipts were produced
with Out-stationed Bills Discounted (O.B.D) and Bills Purchased
(B.P) and in all, the appellant and accused no.5 presented to the
Bank 25 bills to the tune of Rs.18,57,064.40/-, and the firm availed
the credit facility from the Bank against such bills, by presenting
fake transport receipts – Accused charged u/ss.161, 166, 420, 468
& 471, IPC r/w ss.5(1)(d), 5(2) of 1947 Act – Special Judge
convicted the accused nos.1-4 – High Court confirmed the
conviction and sentences imposed on the appellant –On appeal,
held: Findings recorded supporting the prosecution case were in
conformity with the oral and documentary evidence on record –
Appellant knowing fully well that the invoices/bills were fake and
fabricated, presented on behalf of the firm to the bank and thus
cheated the bank – Prosecution proved the guilt of the appellant
   [2019] 15 S.C.R. 358
358
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
359
beyond reasonable doubt – However, in assessing the sentencing,
the crime test requires adequate deference to factors such as role
of the accused and his position within the rank of conspirators,
among other things – In view of the fact that the appellant was
only a salaried employee working in the firm owned by the accused
no.2 and was relatively lower in the hierarchy, it is fit case to
modify the sentence imposed on the appellant, while confirming
the conviction – Period of sentence modified – All the sentences
to run concurrently – Bail bonds of the appellant cancelled, who
shall surrender within 4 weeks from today, failing which steps be
taken to take him into custody for serving the remaining period of
sentence – Penal Code, 1860 – ss.120-B, 161, 166, 420, 468 and
471 – Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 – ss.5(1)(d), (2).
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD: 1.1 When the advocate on record who filed the
appeal was elevated to the Bench, it was for the appellant to
make his own arrangement for appointing another advocate in
the place of earlier advocate on record. Appellant did not take
any steps in this regard. Even notice sent to the appellant was
not received by him for want of correct address. As such there
was no option except to proceed for disposal of the appeal filed
by the appellant, by appointing amicus curiae. Mere allegation
that the amicus curiae appointed was earlier junior counsel of
C.B.I. advocate, is no ground to interfere with the impugned
judgment. The findings recorded in support of the case of the
prosecution were in conformity with the oral and documentary
evidence on record. The appellant knowing fully well that the
invoices/bills were fake and fabricated, were presented on behalf
of the firm to the bank and thus cheated the bank. The
prosecution has proved the guilt of the appellant beyond
reasonable doubt to record conviction of the appellant. [Para 10]
[365-D-G]
1.2 Having regard to totality of the facts and circumstances
of the case and evidence on record, taking note of the fact that
the appellant was working in the firm owned by the accused no.2,
he was salaried employee and and he was relatively lower in the
hierarchy. it is a fit case to modify the sentence imposed on the
appellant, while confirming the conviction. In assessing the
MAYANK N SHAH v. STATE OF GUJARAT & ANR.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
360
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.