RAM JAS vs STATE OF U.P. Supreme Court, 11-09-1970
| Date | 11 September 1970 |
| Docket Number | Appeal (civil) 113 of 1967 |
| Parties | RAM JASSTATE OF U.P. |
| Court | Supreme Court (India) |
http://JUDIS.NIC.IN SUPREME COURT OF INDIAPage 1 of 5
PETITIONER:
RAM JAS
Vs.
RESPONDENT:
STATE OF U.P.
DATE OF JUDGMENT:
11/09/1970
BENCH:
BHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA
BENCH:
BHARGAVA, VISHISHTHA
DUA, I.D.
CITATION:
1974 AIR 1811 1971 SCR (2) 178
1970 SCC (2) 740
ACT:
Criminal Trial-Indian Penal Code, 1860, s. 419 read with s.
109 High Court changing conviction to one of abetting
cheating by personation when no charge was framed and also
maintaining fine and in default 2 years R.I. awarded by the
trial court-Propriety of-lnducing Oath Commissioner to
attest affidavit of person wrongly identified-If amounts to
offence of cheating.
HEADNOTE:
The appellant and four others were charged under s. 120B
I.P.C. and ss. 420, 511, 467, 468 and 471 read with s. 120B
of I.P.C. The trial court convicted the appellant and
awarded a cumulative sentence of 3 years’ rigorous
imprisonment and imposed a fine and in default two years
rigorous imprisonment. In appeal the High Court was of the
view that the appellant had committed an offence punishable
under s. 419 read with s. 109 I.P.C., even if the other
charges, for which he had been convicted, may not be
established. On this view and relying on the power of the
court to convert his conviction to appropriate sections of
the Penal Code, the High Court substituted for the
conviction recorded by the trial court a conviction under s.
419 read with s. 109 I.P.C. and reduced the sentence to two
years’ rigorous imprisonment, while maintaining the fine.
The Court did not examine the evidence relating to the
offences for which the appellant had been convicted by the
trial court and did not record any findings on the facts
which, according to the prosecution. constituted the
commission of those offences. The court found that the
appellant had at least abetted the execution of one false
affidavit of G, which in fact was signed by some person
other than G and that person was wrongly identified by the
appellant before the Oath Commissioner, and, as such, the
appellant was held guilty of abetting the offence of read
with s.109 I.P.C. Setting aside the conviction,
HELD : The High Court lost sight of the fact that no
charge under s. 419 readwith s. 109 I.P.C. was framed
against the appellant in the trial court. In addition the
appellant, when questioned under s. 342 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, after the prosecution evidence had been
Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI
Get Started for FreeUnlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations
Unlock full access with a free 7-day trial
Transform your legal research with vLex
-
Complete access to the largest collection of common law case law on one platform
-
Generate AI case summaries that instantly highlight key legal issues
-
Advanced search capabilities with precise filtering and sorting options
-
Comprehensive legal content with documents across 100+ jurisdictions
-
Trusted by 2 million professionals including top global firms
-
Access AI-Powered Research with Vincent AI: Natural language queries with verified citations