1956 (9) TMI 59 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Conspiracy to cheat members of the public.
2. Specific offences of cheating.
3. Setting aside the acquittal by the High Court.
4. Misjoinder of charges.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Conspiracy to Cheat Members of the Public:
Both the lower courts found that there was a conspiracy during the years 1945-48 to cheat members of the public. The method involved persuading individuals to purchase counterfeit Rs. 5 currency notes at half their face value and then absconding with their money. The courts concluded that the evidence was overwhelming and convincing to prove the existence of the conspiracy as charged. The Supreme Court found no special circumstance to interfere with this finding of fact.

2. Specific Offences of Cheating:
- Appellant Abbas: Both courts found him guilty of the offence of conspiracy and the specific offence of cheating Krishnaswami Naicker (P.W. 47). The evidence of Krishnaswami Naicker was corroborated by several prosecution witnesses, including the approver Ramaswami Mudaliar (P.W. 91). The courts found no reasonable ground to conclude that P.W. 47 had perjured himself. The conviction of Abbas under Section 120-B and Section 420, Indian Penal Code, was justified.
- Appellant Swamirathnam: The High Court set aside his acquittal by the Sessions Judge and convicted him of the offence of conspiracy and the offence of cheating Ramaswami Mudaliar (P.W. 91). The documentary evidence corroborated the approver's testimony, proving the connection of Swamirathnam with the conspiracy beyond all reasonable doubt. The High Court was justified in convicting him of the offence of conspiracy under charge No. 1.
- Appellant Abu Bucker: Initially acquitted by the Sessions Judge for the specific offence of cheating under charge No. 11, the High Court set aside this acquittal and convicted him. The High Court found sufficient material to justify this conviction.

3. Setting Aside the Acquittal by the High Court:
It was argued that the High Court acted unreasonably in setting aside the acquittal of Swamirathnam and Abu Bucker, as there was no compelling necessity. The High Court, however, was aware of the decisions of the Supreme Court and the Privy Council regarding the circumstances under which an acquittal could be set aside. The Supreme Court found that the High Court acted within its scope and reasonably in setting aside the acquittal.

4. Misjoinder of Charges:
On behalf of Abu Bucker, it was contended that there was a misjoinder of charges, arguing that several distinct conspiracies had been lumped together. However, the Supreme Court found no ground for this contention. The charge disclosed a single conspiracy with the object of cheating members of the public, and the instances of cheating were parts of the same transaction.

Conclusion:
The Supreme Court found no merit in the appeals and dismissed them, affirming the convictions of the appellants for the offences of conspiracy and specific instances of cheating.