MANORANJAN DAS versus STATE OF JHARKHAND

MANORANJAN DAS versus STATE OF JHARKHAND

There is no evidence to show the appellant was related to or complicit in the fraud committed by the account-holder, nor any evidence of instigation or involvement; mere introduction does not constitute abetment of cheating under sections 420/109 IPC.

Parties
Appellant: Manoranjan Das; Respondent: State of Jharkhand
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
21 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Revision
Outcome
Appeal allowed; acquittal granted.
Legal Topics
Cheating, Abetment, Bank Fraud
Criminal Law Cheating Abetment Bank Fraud

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Manoranjan Das

Appellant

State of Jharkhand

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Supreme Court Appeal From High Court Revision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether an introducer to a bank account is liable for abetting cheating under sections 420/109 IPC when account-holder commits fraud by presenting fake drafts.

Ratio Decidendi

There is no evidence to show the appellant was related to or complicit in the fraud committed by the account-holder, nor any evidence of instigation or involvement; mere introduction does not constitute abetment of cheating under sections 420/109 IPC.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; acquittal granted.

Orders

  • Judgment of trial court, Sessions Court, and High Court set aside.
  • Appellant acquitted of charge under sections 420/109 IPC.