- (1.) - Heard learned counsel. These two appeals are directed against the judgment of the High Court of Rajasthan. The two appellants -father and son have been found guilty under Sections 420 as well as 120-B/420 Indian Penal Code. The trial court convicted Gurbachan Singh for the said offence and sentenced him to imprisonment till rising of the court and to pay a fine of Rs. 2500/ - on each count and in default of payment of fine, to further undergo one year's rigorous imprisonment on each count. Mohanjit Singh is convicted under Sections 120-B and 420 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment till rising of the court and a fine of Rs. 1,000/- on each count, in default of payment of fine six months' rigorous imprisonment on each count. One Dharam Dev Agarwal was also convicted under Sections 120-E and 420 Indian Penal Code and sentenced to six months' rigorous imprisonment on each count and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/- on each count and in default of payment of fine further to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months on each count. These three convicted accused preferred an appeal to the High Court and the State also preferred a Criminal Revision No. 127 of 1973 for enhancement of the sentence awarded to Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh. The High Court dismissed all the appeals filed by the convicted accused and allowed Revision Petition filed by the State and enhanced the sentence of Gurbachan Singh and Mohanjit Singh to six months' rigorous imprisonment under each count and sentences were directed to run concurrently. Hence, these two appeals.
(2.) The prosecution case is that Gurbachan Singh is the sole proprietor of the firm and there was an agreement between the firm and the bank in respect of advancement of cash credits. It is alleged that Gurbachan Singh and his son Mohanjit Singh entered into a criminal conspiracy with two other accused viz., Dharam Dev Agarwal, who was a godown-keeper and one Ramesh Chandra in order to commit or cause to be committed the offences of cheating by inducing the bank on false and fraudulent representation of facts to grant or advance, withdrawals of more amounts than the amount for which the firm would have been eligible. It was further alleged that the godown-keeper made false entries regarding the quantities and thus the bank was cheated to the tune of Rupees 1,45,774.47 paise. This was discovered and a report was lodged with the police. The case was investigated and charge-sheet was laid. The accused denied the offence and pleaded that they were not responsible for any of the omissions and commissions for which they were being charged.
(3.) The trial Court has found that the guilt of the three accused was established and convicted them. Only Gurbachan Singh and his son Mohanjit Singh are now before us. Both the courts below have held that there is an overwhelming evidence establishing the guilt of the accused and the goods from the godown would not have been disappeared without the consent or knowledge of the accused persons for which the accused had no explanation. In view of the concurrent findings, we see no ground to interfere.;