Document Fragment View

Matching Fragments

3. Brief facts of the case of the appellant before the trial court which leads to file this appeal in brief are as follows:-

The complainant police have registered FIR in Cr.No.402/2017 against the accused No.1 and 2 alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.420 and 511 r/w Sec.34 of IPC, on the basis of information given by one Smt.Urmila Sathyanarayana. The complainant police after conducting investigation of the case have filed charge sheet against accused No.1 and 2 before the learned 56th ACMM, Bengaluru. After filing of the charge sheet, the Learned Magistrate took cognizance for the offences punishable u/ Sec.420, 511 r/w Sec.34 of IPC against the accused No.1 and 2 and registered criminal case bearing CC.No.4148/2018 and issued summons to the accused. It is alleged in the charge sheet that the accused No.1 procure fake gold coin from accused No.2 and the accused Crl.A.No.1998/2019 No.1 knowing fully well that the said gold coins are fake gold coins, trying to sell the said fake gold coins on 10.10.2017 at about 9.30 a.m. to Attica Gold Private Limited Company, stating that those gold coins are real gold coins and thereby attempted to commit the offence of cheating.
interrelated to each other and as such, they are taken together for discussion to avoid repetition of facts.
8

Crl.A.No.1998/2019

15. The PSI of Kengeri police station has filed the charge sheet before learned 56th ACMM, Bengaluru against the accused No.1 by alleging the commission of offences punishable u/Sec.420 and 511 r/w Sec.34 of IPC. One Smt.Urmila Sathyanarayana had given report to the complainant police against the accused No.1 by alleging that the accused No.1 has tried to sell the fake gold coins with intention to cheat Attica Gold Company. On the basis of said complaint, Kengeri police have registered Cr.No.402/2017 against the accused / appellant by alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.511 and 420 of IPC. The said police, after conducting the investigation of the case have filed charge sheet before the court against two accused by alleging the offences punishable u/Sec.511 and 420 r/w Sec.34 of IPC. The appellant of this appeal is shown as accused No.1 in the charge sheet. It is alleged in the charge sheet that the accused No.1 has procured fake gold coins from accused No.2. The accused No.1 having knowledge that the gold coins are fake gold coins has tried to sell the said fake gold coins on 10.10.2017 at about 9.30 a.m. to Attica Gold company situated at 80 feet road, 1st main road, building No.865 in 2nd floor in the presence of C.W.4 and 5 by making them to believe that those gold coins are the pure gold coins and thereby attempted to cheat the informant company.

30. The trial court in the impugned judgment has assigned valid reasons to believe the evidence of P.W.3. The trial court on the basis of the evidence of pW.3 and on the basis of evidence of investigating officer has rightly come to the conclusion that the accused No.1 has committed the offence punishable u/Sec.511 r/w Sec.420 of IPC. Sec.511 of IPC provides for punishment for attempting to commit the offences punishable with imprisonment for life or other imprisonment. Sec.420 of IPC provides for punishment for cheating and dishonestly inducing the person deceived to deliver any property to any person, or to make, alter or destroy whole or any part of a valuable security etc. In the case before the trial court, the prosecution has adduced sufficient evidence to prove beyond reasonable doubt that accused No.1 in furtherance of common intention with accused No.2 has attempted to deceive the staff of Attica Gold company by giving fake gold coins and accused No.1 has fraudulently and dishonestly induced the staff of Attica Gold company to Crl.A.No.1998/2019 receive the said fake gold coins and to give money for the same. Though the offence of cheating is not completed. But the facts and circumstances of the case before the trial court as discussed above are sufficient to come to the conclusion that accused No.1 has attempted to commit the offence of cheating punishable u/Sec.420 of IPC. As such, I am of the opinion that the trial court has rightly convicted the accused No.1 for the offence punishable u/Sec.511 r/w Se.420 of IPC. As such, I do not find any valid grounds to interfere with the finding of the trial court convicting the accused No.1 for the offence punishable u/Sec511 r/w Sec.420 of IPC.

31. The offence u/Sec.420 of IPC is punishable with imprisonment for a period which may extent to seven years and shall also liable to be fine. u/Sec.511 of IPC, the court can sentence the accused to one-half of longest term of imprisonment provided for that offence. The trial court has sentenced the accused to undergo imprisonment for the period of three months and to pay fine of Rs.2,000/- and in default of pay of fine, the accused shall undergo simple imprisonment for the period of seven days. The sentence passed by the trial court is not against to the provisions of Sec.511 of IPC. The prosecution has not challenged the sentence passed by the trial court. As such, I do not find any grounds to interfere with the sentence passed by the trial court. The appellant has failed to prove Crl.A.No.1998/2019 that the trial court is erred in convicting him for the offence punishable u/Sec.511 r/w Sec.420 of IPC. I do not find any merits in the various grounds urged by the appellant in the appeal memorandum. On any of the said grounds, the prosecution case cannot be disbelieved. The prosecution has proved beyond reasonable doubt that the appellant has attempted to commit the offence of cheating on the staff of Attica gold company. As such, the trial court has rightly convicted the accused for the offence punishable u.Sec.511 r/w Sec.420 of IPC and has rightly sentenced the appellant for the said offence. As such, I do not find any valid grounds to interfere with the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by the trial court. As such, appeal filed by the appellant is deserves to be dismissed. Accordingly, I answer Points No.1 to 3 in Negative.