Kumar Garg Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh  INSC 293 (14 May 1993)
N.P. (J) Singh N.P. (J) Anand, A.S. (J)
1993 SCR (3) 900 1993 SCC Supl. (3) 359 JT 1993 (3) 369 1993 SCALE (2)960
Indian Penal Code-Sections 419, 420, 408 and 471-Offence under-Reduction of
sentence Upon repayment of amount.
appellant was charged with cheating the U.P. Industrial Corporation of Rs.
39,352.50 by registering a take concern, and taking in its name. Three courts
concurrently found the charges against him established.
question of sentence, it was contended that more than 20 %-cars had elapsed;
the amount involved was not excessive and other mitigating circumstances were
placed (in the record.
allowing the appeal, this Court
appellant had deposited Rs. 40,000/- (the loan amount) as directed. (901-G)
the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case, conviction maintained but
sentence of imprisonment reduced to the period already undergone, and a fine of
Rs. 2,000/-, or one month R.I. in lieu thereof. (902-B)
APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 830 of 1985.
the Judgment and Order dated 30.7.85 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl.
Revision No. 1937 of 1983.
A.K. Srivastava and Serva Mitter for the Appellant.
and A.S. Pundit.for the Respondent.
Judgment of the Court was delivered by 901 N.P. SINGH.1. The appellant, was
convicted under Sections 120-B, 419, 420, 468, and 471 of the Penal Code. lie was
sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonments for different periods under the
aforesaid Sections. The appeal filed on behalf of the appellant was dismissed
by the learned additional Sessions Judge, Ghaziabad. The High Court, on revision application being filed on behalf of the
appellant set-aside his conviction under Section 120-B, but the conviction and
sentence under other Sections mentioned above passed by the trial Court were
to the prosecution case, the appellant, established a firm by the name of Seemak
Industrial Corporation at Ghaziabad. The
account in the bank was opened in the name of one Vijai Kumar and the aforesaid
Industrial Corporation was registered in the Sales Tax Department. The
appellant applied for loan before the U.P.
Industries Corporation and got a sum of Rs. 39,352.50, in the name of Seemak
Industrial Corporation. Later it was discovered that the aforesaid Seemak
Industrial Corporation, was a fake concern and the appellant had cheated, even
the U.P. Small Industries Corporation, in respect of the amount advanced by
them. The Trial Court, the Appellate Court as well as the High Court have gone
into details of the materials on record for purpose of holding, that the
charges framed against the appellant had been established and as such there was
no occasion to interfere with the conviction and sentence passed against him.
the present appeal is concerned, leave was granted as early as in the year 1985
by this Court, but it has been listed for hearing after about 8 years. The
learned Counsel. appearing for the appellant, after some arguments on merit
confined his submissions to the question of sentence only. lie pointed out that
offences aforesaid had been committed by the appellant, as early as in the year
1973, more than 20 years from now and as such a compassionate view should be
taken of the whole matter especially when the amount in respect of which the
offences are alleged to have been committed is not excessive. He pointed out
that the appellant has remained in jail for some time, in pursuance of the
order of conviction and sentence and as such he need not be sent to jail again.
An affidavit detailing the mitigating circumstances has also been filed by the
appellant before us. Taking all facts and circumstances into consideration, by
our order dated 26th April, 1993 we directed the appellant to first deposit an
amount of Rs. 40,000 (the loan amount) with the U.P. Small Industries
Corporation Ltd. Pursuant to that order Rs. 40.000 has been deposited with the
U.P. Small Industries Corporation Ltd., on 4-5-1993 and original receipt
granted by the Manager of the said Corporation was produced before us. The zerox
copy, of the said original receipt has been kept on record and the original
returned to the learned counsel for the appellant. An affidavit has also been
filed on behalf 'of the appellant stating about 902 the aforesaid deposit.
peculiar facts and circumstances of the case while maintaining the conviction
of the appellant, we reduce the sentence of imprisonment under different
Sections mentioned above to the period already undergone by him. The appellant,
shall however pay a fine of Rs. 2,000 and in default of payment thereof, he
shall undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one month. The appeal is
allowed in part.
deposit of Rs. 40,000 made by the appellant with the U.P. Small Industries
Corporation Ltd., shall be adjusted towards the amount advanced by the said
Corporation to the appellant. The Corporation shall of course be at liberty to
take steps for realisation of any further sum. which may be due. against the
Appeal partly allowed.