State vs Gufran Ahmed on 16 January, 2026
5. At the stage of charge framing, the Ld.
Predecessor noted that the accused Gufran Ahmad also
received cheques and H- Form meant for firm of the
complainant from 'M/s SA Enterprises' wherein co-accused
Shagun Dhawan was also a partner. Shagun Dhawan had
herself given H- Form and cheques to the accused Gufran
State Vs. Gufran Ahmed
FIR No. 87/2008
PS: EOW
Page No. 3 of 11
Ahmad. She also introduced accused Gufran Ahmad in the
bank for opening account in the name of 'M/s V.A.
Enterprises'. Thus, the Ld. Predecessor held that accused
Shagun Dhawan in criminal conspiracy with the accused
Gufran Ahmad handed over him cheques and H-form
meant for the firm of the complainant and also helped
accused Gufran Ahamed in opening the account in the
name of 'M/s V.A. Enterprises', to get those cheques
encashed. Under these circumstances, in respect of cheques
and H- Form received and dishonestly misappropriated by
accused Gufran Ahmad received from firm M/s S.A.
Enterprises, he was liable for commission of offence of
criminal misappropriation u/s 403 IPC. The Ld.
Predecessor also noted that based on above stated facts, the
offence u/s 120-B r/w Section 403 IPC was also made out
against accused Gufran Ahmad and co-accused Shagun
Dhawan. He observed that criminal conspiracy among
them was apparent from the handing over of cheques meant
for firm of complainant to him and by helping him in
opening a bank account in the same name as firm of the
complainant.