Case Note & Summary
The case pertains to a criminal revision application filed by Vilas Narayan Ganvir challenging his conviction and sentence under Sections 171, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The applicant was convicted by the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Desaiganj, and his appeal was dismissed by the Sessions Judge, Gadchiroli. The prosecution case was that on 9th and 10th December 2013, the informant was traveling on his motorcycle when a person in police uniform, introducing himself as Police Inspector Maske, requested a lift. During the journey, the accused claimed to be a police officer and informed the informant about recruitment for police constables, stating that some candidates had been disqualified and others could be appointed. He took the informant's mobile number. Subsequently, on 15th December 2013, the accused called the informant and asked him to apply for recruitment, demanding money for the process. The informant paid Rs. 1,50,000 to the accused over time. The accused was later arrested and charged. The trial court convicted the accused, and the appellate court upheld the conviction. In revision, the High Court examined the evidence and found that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused impersonated a police officer and cheated the informant. The court noted that the accused had shown a fake identity card and made false promises of employment. The High Court held that the findings of the courts below were based on evidence and were not perverse, and therefore, no interference was warranted in revisional jurisdiction. The revision application was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence were upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Impersonation - Section 171 IPC - Personation at Election - Accused impersonated a police officer to induce informant to part with money for false promise of employment - Held that the evidence clearly established the accused's impersonation and dishonest intention (Paras 2-5). B) Criminal Law - Cheating - Sections 419, 420 IPC - Cheating by Personation - Accused falsely represented himself as Police Inspector Maske and induced informant to pay Rs. 1,50,000 for securing a police constable job - Held that all ingredients of cheating by personation were satisfied (Paras 3-6). C) Criminal Procedure - Revision - Scope of Revisional Jurisdiction - High Court in revision cannot reappreciate evidence unless findings are perverse or illegal - Held that concurrent findings of fact by courts below were based on evidence and not perverse, hence no interference warranted (Paras 7-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the conviction of the applicant under Sections 171, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, based on the evidence on record, is sustainable in law.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the criminal revision application and upheld the conviction and sentence awarded by the trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.
Law Points
- Conviction under Sections 171
- 419
- 420 IPC requires proof of impersonation
- cheating
- and dishonest inducement
- appellate court cannot reappreciate evidence in revision unless perverse
- concurrent findings of fact binding in revision.
