1961 (4) TMI 93 - SC - Indian Laws

Appeal dismissed, conviction upheld for attempted cheating by deceptive actions.

The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the appellant's conviction under Section 420, read with Section 511 IPC. The appellant's deceptive actions in ... - Issues Involved:1. Whether the appellant's actions constituted an attempt to cheat the University.2. Whether the issuance of the admission card to the appellant would have resulted in the commission of the offence of cheating.3. Whether the appellant's actions went beyond mere preparation and amounted to an attempt to commit the offence of cheating.Detailed Analysis:1. Whether the appellant's actions constituted an attempt to cheat the University:The appellant applied to Patna University for permission to appear at the 1954 M.A. Examination in English as a private candidate, falsely claiming to be a graduate and a teacher. He supported his application with forged certificates. The University, deceived by these false representations, granted permission and issued an admission card. The appellant's actions were found to be an attempt to cheat the University by inducing it to deliver the admission card, considered 'property' under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The court held that the appellant's false statements and the subsequent issuance of the admission card amounted to an attempt to cheat the University.2. Whether the issuance of the admission card to the appellant would have resulted in the commission of the offence of cheating:The court examined the definition of 'cheating' under Section 415 IPC, which involves deceiving any person and fraudulently or dishonestly inducing them to deliver any property or to do or omit to do anything that they would not do if not deceived, causing or likely to cause damage or harm in body, mind, reputation, or property. The court concluded that the appellant's false representations induced the University to issue the admission card, which would have enabled him to sit for the examination. This card, although not having pecuniary value, was considered 'property' as it had immense value to the candidate. The appellant's actions, therefore, constituted an attempt to commit the offence of cheating under Section 420, read with Section 511 IPC.3. Whether the appellant's actions went beyond mere preparation and amounted to an attempt to commit the offence of cheating:The court emphasized the distinction between preparation and attempt. Preparation involves devising or arranging the means necessary for the commission of the offence, while an attempt is the direct movement towards the commission after preparations are made. The court held that the appellant's actions, including submitting the application, remitting the fees, and sending photographs, went beyond mere preparation and constituted an attempt to commit the offence. The court referred to various precedents, including Queen Empress v. Appasami and Queen Empress v. Soshi Bhushan, to support its conclusion that the appellant's actions amounted to an attempt to cheat the University.Conclusion:The court dismissed the appeal, holding that the appellant was rightly convicted of the offence under Section 420, read with Section 511 IPC. The appellant's actions of deceiving the University and inducing it to issue the admission card constituted an attempt to cheat, going beyond mere preparation. The court affirmed the High Court's decision, emphasizing that the appellant's actions met the criteria for an attempt to commit the offence of cheating.