THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1784 OF 2003. DATED:18-11-2009. Between: Myla Dasu @ Youdasu …Petitioner-A1 and 1.State of A.P. rep. By Public Prosecutor and another …Respondents- complainants THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE K.C.BHANU CRIMINAL REVISION CASE NO.1784 OF 2003. ORDER: This Criminal Revision case by the petitioner-A1 under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. is directed against the judgment, dated 14-02-2003, in Criminal Appeal No.390 of 2000, on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur. 2. Brief facts of the case are that A1 is educated one and physically handicapped person. He used to sit near employment exchange office, Guntur to fill up the forms of the unemployed candidates and getting remuneration from them. A1 with the assistance of A2 planned to trap the unemployed youth promising to secure RPF constable jobs at Vijayawada and approached P.W.1 for giving Rs.50,000/- for getting RPF constable and asked him to get more candidates. Believing the version of A1, P.W.1 secured P.Ws. 2 to 5. A1 asked P.Ws. 1 to 5 to secure an amount of Rs.50,000/- within a week. P.W.1 paid an amount of Rs.55,000/- , P.Ws.2,4 and 5 paid an amount of Rs.25,000/- each and P.W.3 paid an amount of Rs.20,000/- and two others paid Rs.12,000/- and Rs.25,000/- to A1. Later P.W.1 also paid some other amounts to A1 and A2 as demanded by them. Thereafter, when P.W.1 met A2, he informed that he retired from service and he is not concerned with the matter and stated that they gave money only on the advice of A1 and as such, the matter will be settled by A1. At that time A1 informed that the person who promised to give orders was suspended and that he will get orders as soon as possible. As there was no hope for getting the orders in the near future, P.Ws. 1 to 5 and others pressed to return the money, for which A1 turned violent and stated P.W.1 to take whatever steps he wants to take and threatened P.W.1 with dire consequences. As A1 and A2 cheated them, they gave a report to the police, basing on which police registered a case under Sections 419 and 420 IPC and after completion of investigation, filed the charge sheet. 3. When charges under Sections 419 and 420 IPC were framed, read over and explained to the accused in Telugu, they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. 4. To substantiate the charges, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 1 to 7 and got marked Exs.P1 and P2. No evidence either oral or documentary was adduced on behalf of the accused. 5. The learned V Additional Munsif Magistrate, Guntur, accepting the evidence of prosecution witnesses found A1 and A2 guilty and accordingly, convicted and sentenced them to undergo R.I. for six months each of the offence punishable under Section 419 IPC and further sentenced to undergo RI for one year each and also to pay a fine of Rs.1,000/- each, in default to undergo S.I. for one month each of the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC, vide judgment, dated 26-07-2000, in C.C.No.260 of 1999. On appeal, the learned Sessions Judge, vide impugned judgment while acquitting A1 and A2 of the offence punishable under Section 419 IPC, confirmed the conviction and sentence recorded against them of the offence punishable under Section 420 IPC. Aggrieved thereby, A1 preferred this revision. 6. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner-A1 contended that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 5 is mutually contradictory and inconsistent and hence, he prays to set aside the conviction and sentence recorded against the petitioner. 7. On the other hand, counsel representing the learned Public Prosecutor opposed the same on the ground that the evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 5 is very clear that A1 and A2 collected certain amount with false promise and hence, she prays to dismiss the revision. 8. Now the point that arises for consideration is whether the findings of both the courts below are legal, proper and correct? 9. Revisional jurisdiction of this Court under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. is truncated one. Unless the findings are illegal or improper or incorrect, normally this Court would not interfere with the same. 10. Necessary ingredients to constitute the offence of cheating which is defined under Section 415 I.P.C. are: (1) There should be fraudulent or dishonest inducement of a person by deceiving him, (2) (a) the person so deceived should be induced to deliver any property to any person or to consent that any person shall retain any property; or (b) the person so deceived should be intentionally induced to do or omit to do anything which he would not do or omit if he were not so deceived, and (3) in cases covered by (2)(b) the act or omission should be one which causes or is likely to cause damage or harm to the person induced in body, mind, reputation or property. 11. The evidence of P.Ws. 1 to 5 is very clear that A1 and A2 promissing them to secure a job as Railway Protection Force Constable on payment of Rs.50,000/- each, collected Rs.55,000/- from P.W.1, Rs.20,000/- from P.W.2 and Rs.25,000/- each from P.Ws. 3 to 5. There was inducement or false representation made to P.Ws. 1 to 5 by A1 and A2. The prosecution witnesses approached A1 and A2 in the month of March, 1997 with regard to securing jobs. A1 was postponing the matter. Then P.Ws. 1 to 5 demanded A1 to return the amount, but A1 failed to comply with the same. It is established that the fraudulent or dishonest intention entertained by the petitioner was at the time of making promise. That promise prima facie false. Therefore by making false promise to P.Ws. 1 to 5, petitioner collected certain amount from them causing wrongful loss to P.Ws. 1 to 5 and the petitioner gained unlawfully. Their evidence is consistent with regard to petitioner inducing them to part with certain amount from P.Ws. 1 to 5. From the evidence, allegation of cheating is made out. None of the findings is shown to be perverse or contrary to law. Hence, the revision is liable to be dismissed. 12. Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed confirming the judgment, dated 14-02-2003, in Criminal Appeal No.390 of 2000, on the file of the III Additional Sessions Judge, Guntur. --------------------- K.C.BHANU, J DATED:18-11-2009. Hsd