In an appeal against conviction and sentence for cheating and forgery related to loan fraud, the Supreme Court upheld the conviction but reduced the sentence to the period already undergone, considering the appellant's poverty and health issues.
Sentence reduced to period already undergone; bail bond discharged.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
NON-REPORTABLE
2024 INSC 185
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 870 OF 2010
JAGJIT SINGH …APPELLANT
VERSUS
CENTRAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION …RESPONDENT
J U D G M E N T
J.B. PARDIWALA, J.:
the appellant herein guilty of the offences punishable under Section(s) 120B, 420,
467 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, “ IPC ”).
Signature Not Verified Digitally signed by CHETAN KUMAR Date: 2024.03.07 13:49:15 IST Reason:
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 1 of 9
A. CASE OF THE PROSECUTION
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 2 of 9
whose name the loans were sanctioned in the first place were illiterate persons to
whom these vehicles were never supplied by the company.
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 3 of 9
B. TRIAL COURT’S JUDGEMENT OF CONVICTION
the Special Judge, CBI, Patiala came to the conclusion that all of the accused persons including the appellant herein were guilty. The Trial Court observed as
under: -
“ 56. Point No. 3 Whether accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon fraudulently and dishonestly prepared false documents for the purpose of cheating.
Accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon introduced six loanees to the bank. These loanees are Padam Singh, Pawan Kumar, Subhash Chand, Harl Chand, Resham Singh and Shiv Dayal son of Vassu Ram. PW 21 Harnek Singh identified the signatures of accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon on the account opening forms of the loanees. Not only accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon introduced these loanees. He also deposited the margin money in the account of all the 10 loanees. The credit vouchers are Ex. PW' 16/ 17 to Ex. PW 16/26. These are filled in the handwriting of accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon. PW 16 Kartar Singh proved the handwriting and signatures of accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon on all these forms. Accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon filled up the pay-in-slips vide which money was, credited in the account of M/s. Oriental Motors. These pay-in-slips are Ex. PW.16/13, Ex. PW 16/14, Ex.PW 13/6, Ex. PW 14/3, Ex. PW 4/5, Ex.PW14/8, Ex. PW 16/16, Ex. PW 14/4, Ex. PW 14/7. Accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon issued sale letters/invoices on behalf of M/s Oriental Motors. The sale letters are Ex. PW 31 /3, Ex. PW 31 /9, Ex. PW 31 /15, Ex. PW 31 /16, Ex. PW 31132, Ex. PW 31 /23, ·Ex. PW 31/29, Ex. PW 31/30, Ex. PW 31/36, Ex. PW 31/37. From the statements of PW 48 S.K. Saxena, Dy. Govt. Examiner of questioned documents, it is proved· that the disputed signatures l 01 to 08 on documents Ex. PW 31 /29, Ex. PW 31 /30, Ex. PW 31/36, Ex. PW 31/37, Ex. PW 31/15, Ex. PW 31/15, Ex. PW 31/22 and Ex. PW 31 /23 are of accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon. Evidence has been discussed in detail under point No. 1. Accused Jagjit Singh Dhillon thus forged the documents with dishonest Intention to cheat the bank. These documents were valuable security.
(Emphasis supplied)
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 4 of 9
xxx xxx xxx
60. Conclusion
In view of the. above discussed evidence, charge against the accused is proved beyond reasonable doubt. [...]”
Section(s) 120B, 420, 467 and 468 resply of the IPC and sentenced to a rigorous imprisonment (R.I.) of total 6-years 2-months with a fine of Rs. 7,000/- , being as under: -
| S.N. | OFFENCE | SENTENCE |
|---|---|---|
| 1. | S.120B | R.I. for 2-months w/ fine of Rs. 2,000/-. |
| 2. | S.420 | R.I. for 2-years w/ fine of Rs. 3,000/-. |
| 3. | S.467 | R.I. for 2-years w/ fine of Rs. 1,000/-. |
| 4. | S.468 | R.I. for 2-years w/ fine of Rs. 1,000/-. |
C. IMPUGNED ORDER
evidence on record dismissed the appeals and thereby affirmed the judgement of
conviction and order on sentence as passed by the Trial Court.
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 5 of 9
“ Appellant Jagjit Singh worked as Sales Manager of M/s. Oriental Motors. He was instrumental in getting ten transport vehicle loans of the loanees, afore - mentioned. He deposited margin money on their behalf. He introduced the loanees to the Bank. He issued bogus invoices/sales letters showing sale of vehicles to the loanees, when in fact no vehicle was delivered to them. The amounts were credited to the account of M/s. Oriental Motors vide pay- in slips prepared by appellant Jagjit Singh. The five loanees examined by the prosecution stated that they did not deposit the margin money in their accounts in the Bank. The pay-in slips were filled up in the handwriting of appellant Jagjit Singh vide which money was credited to the account of M/s. Oriental motors, Bathinda. Appellant Jagjit Singh had thus active role to play in the criminal conspiracy under which the loan amounts were credited to the account of M/s Oriental Motors, Bathinda. ”
(Emphasis supplied)
Court with the present appeal.
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 6 of 9
and when the criminal proceeding was initiated in 1990, he was the sole breadwinner in the family. In 1992, during investigation and the ongoing trial, he was removed from service for his misconduct, and owing to the pendency of the criminal case, he was unable to find another job.
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 7 of 9
E. CONCLUSION
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 8 of 9
adopted by the Trial Court as well as by the High Court in holding the appellant guilty of the alleged crime. No interference is warranted so far as conviction is concerned.
convict herein as narrated above, we reduce the sentence of the appellant to the period already undergone. His bail bond stands discharged.
............................................................. J. (J.B. Pardiwala)
............................................................. J.
(Manoj Misra)
New Delhi 7th March, 2024
Criminal Appeal No. 870 of 2010
Page 9 of 9
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the conviction of the appellant for cheating and forgery is maintainable given the evidence.
Whether the appellant's mitigating circumstances of poverty and ill health warrant a reduction in sentence.
2 provisions across 2 enactments
Jagjit Singh
Central Bureau of Investigation
J.B. Pardiwala
Manoj Misra
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
