- (1.) This is an application in revision by one Nathimal who has been convicted under Sections 465 and 417 I.P.C. and has been sentenced to a fine of Rs. 200/- and in default to two months' simple imprisonment under Section 465 I.P.C. and to a fine of Rs. 300/- and in default to two months' simple imprisonment under Section 417 I.P.C.
(2.) The prosecution case was as follows: On the 27th of October, 1950 the applicant purchased jewellery worth Rs. 236/- and odd from the complainant Radhey Lal of Agra and promised to send the price later on from Jaipur where he carried on business. He sent a registered insured cover for Rs. 225/- which was delivered to the complainant on 4th November, 1950. When it was opened it was found to contain currency notes worth Rs. 125/- only. Thereupon the complainant immediately informed the postman and also sent a telegram and a letter enquiring from the accused as to why he had sent Rs. 125/- only when the insured cover was for Rs. 225/-. In reply the applicant said that he had in fact sent Rs. 225/- and not Rs. 125/- as alleged by the complainant. Thereafter a complaint was filed against the applicant on the allegation that he had sent only Rs. 125/- but had insured the envelope containing the aforesaid amount for Rs. 225/- and thereby had committed the offence of forgery and cheating.
(3.) The applicant denied that he had put the currency notes worth Rs. 125/- in the envelope or that he had insured it for Rs. 225/-. His case was that he had given the entire money to his son and had asked him to send it in an insured cover to the complainant and the mistake if any was committed by his son. Both the lower courts after a consideration of the evidence produced in the case found that only Rs. 125/- had been sent in the envelope to the complainant but the envelope had been insured for Rs. 225/- and thereby a fraud had been committed on the complainant. Accordingly the applicant was convicted on both the charges. It has been contended on behalf of the applicant that even if the entire prosecution evidence was accepted as correct the charges under Section 465 and 417 I.P.C. had not been established against the applicant. The offence of forgery which is punishable under Section 465 I.P.C. has been defined in Section 463 and runs as follows: Whoever makes any false document or part of a document with intent to cause damage or injury to the public or to any person or to support any claim or title, or to cause any person to part with property or to enter into any express or implied contract or with intent to commit fraud or that fraud may be committed, commits forgery.;