SURINDER DOGRA versus STATE THROUGH DIRECTOR CBI

SURINDER DOGRA versus STATE THROUGH DIRECTOR CBI

The handwriting expert's report and the testimony of a witness familiar with the appellant's handwriting proved that the auditor coupon and flight coupon were issued in the appellant's handwriting while he was manning the ticket counter and in possession of the coupons on the relevant date; consequently he alone could have manipulated the documents and was rightly convicted under Sections 420, 468 and 471 RPC and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Parties
Appellant: Surinder Dogra; Respondent: State Through Director CBI
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
20 February 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Concurrent Conviction, Traffic Superintendent, Indian Airlines, Infant Ticket, Fictitious Name, Tampered, Flight Coupon, Forgery, Auditor Coupon, Adult Ticket, Loss to the Airlines, Pecuniary Advantage, Handwriting Expert
Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Concurrent Conviction Traffic Superintendent Indian Airlines Infant Ticket Fictitious Name +8 more

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 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Surinder Dogra

Appellant

State Through Director CBI

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the concurrent conviction of the appellant under Sections 420, 468 and 471, Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 was justified

Ratio Decidendi

The handwriting expert's report and the testimony of a witness familiar with the appellant's handwriting proved that the auditor coupon and flight coupon were issued in the appellant's handwriting while he was manning the ticket counter and in possession of the coupons on the relevant date; consequently he alone could have manipulated the documents and was rightly convicted under Sections 420, 468 and 471 RPC and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal dismissed
  • Convictions under Sections 420, 468 and 471 of the Ranbir Penal Code, 1989 and Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 upheld