Research › Search › Judgment

Jharkhand High Court · body

2007 DIGILAW 230 (JHR)

Siddique Ansari v. State Of Jharkhand

2007-04-02

DHANANJAY PRASAD SINGH

body2007
JUDGMENT D.P. Singh, J. 1. Solo appellant Md. Siddique Ansari stands convicted for the offence punishable under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to serve simple imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 10,000/- in default thereof to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months, by the 12 th Additional Sessions Judge, Dhanbad in Sessions Trial No. 381 of 1995. 2. Brief facts leading to this appeal are that one Sairun Bibi and the appellant started physical relationship on being assured that the appellant would marry her. According to informant Sairun Bibi, she was neighbour of the appellant and on his assurance; they started having physical relationship for nearly one year when she became pregnant. Thereafter, the matter was reported to the family members, the appellant along with his parents assured her that she would be inducted as the member of their family before the Panchayati. However, after sometimes, she was thrown out of the house and the appellant refused to marry. 3. Ultimately, the informant has lodged a written report before Rajganj Police Station. The police accordingly registered Katras (Rajganj) Police Station Case No. 58 of 1995 under Sections 376, 498 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code against the appellant and his parents. The police after investigating submitted charge sheet against all the three persons. Their case was committed to the trial court where all the three were charged under Sections 498 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and the appellant under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code separately. The appellant pleaded not guilty and claimed false prosecution to pressurize him for getting married with the informant. However, the learned trial court believed the prosecution version partly. The trial court while acquitting the appellant along with two others from all charges under Sections 498 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code, found and held the appellant guilty under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code for inducing the victim for illicit intercourse with false promise of marriage and sentenced him to serve simple imprisonment as stated above. 4. The present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that when the main charges have been found not proved, the conviction under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code for making false promises is undesirable and liable to the set aside. Mr. 4. The present appeal has been preferred mainly on the grounds that when the main charges have been found not proved, the conviction under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code for making false promises is undesirable and liable to the set aside. Mr. A.K. Das, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant, submitted that the police has not recorded the statement of the victim (P.W.5) as well as named witnesses to prove the case that there was any such false promise. According to learned Counsel, when the informant knowingly used to visit the appellant, a person having two children, there may not be any false promise and therefore, conviction under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code be set aside. 5. I have gone through the materials on records along with the impugned judgment dated 30.4.2002 and sentence dated 7.5.2002. The prosecutrix as well as her mother have come to assert that the relationship between the appellant and the prosecutrix was with consent. However, the relationship was established on the premises that she will be married. They have admitted during cross- examination that they knew the appellant was a married man having two children but still she continued to have live in relationship with him with hope that he will be married. Accordingly, the learned trial court has rightly found and held him not guilty under Section 376 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the trial court held that when she became pregnant, the appellant refused to honour his earlier words and in such circumstances, the illicit intercourse was result of a false promise of marriage. 6. The offence under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code defines "the cheat by personation" in Ratanlal and Dhirajlal 29 th edition 2002 reads as follows: 416. Cheating by personation.- A person is said to "cheat by personation" if he cheats by pretending to be some other person, or by knowingly substituting one person for another, or representing that he or any other person is a person other than he or such other person really is.... 417. Punishment for cheating.- Whoever cheats shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both. 7. However, from the facts on records, I do not find that any such offence has been committed. 417. Punishment for cheating.- Whoever cheats shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to one year, or with fine, or with both. 7. However, from the facts on records, I do not find that any such offence has been committed. The trial court has wrongly found and held the appellant guilty under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code in absence of any evidence that he impersonated or concealed and cheated the prosecutrix making false representation on being another person. As such, I find that the conviction of the appellant under Section 417 of the Indian Penal Code cannot be maintained. Accordingly, I find that the present appeal has got merit and deserves to be allowed. 8. In the result, the present appeal is allowed and the judgment of the trial court convicting the appellant is hereby set aside. The appellant is acquitted from the charge levelled against him and further discharged from the liabilities of his bail bonds.