BASIR UDDIN LASKAR Vs. STATE OF ASSAM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision is directed against the judgment and order, dated 15-5-1993, passed by learned Addl. Sessions Judge Cachar, Silchar, in Criminal Appeal No. 5(3) of 1992, dismissing the appeal and upholding the judgment and order, dt. 22-7-92, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Silchar. In C.R. Case No. 1695/89, convicting the petitioner under S. 420, IPC sentencing him to suffer R.I. for six months and pay a fine of Rs. 500.00 and in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for a further period of one month.

(2.) The case against the accused-petitioner, as unfolded at the trial, may, in brief, be stated as follows : the complainant, Abdul Salam Laskar, could not come out with flying colours in HSLC examination held in 1979. He tried to obtain some employment, but came to realise that unless he passed HSLC examination, he had no chance of getting any employment. The complainant approached the accused-petitioner, namely, Basir Uddin Laskar, who was Secretary of Hatikhal High School and a Member of CCJC Higher Secondary School, seeking advice as to how he could appear in the HSLC examination as a private candidate. The accused-petitioner assured the complainant that if he paid Rs. 4000.00 to the accused, he could make arrangements for appearance of the complainant, in the HSLC examination from Hatikhal H.E. School. The complainant accordingly, on 5-10-1988, paid Rs. 4000.00 to the accused-petitioner in presence of witnesses. The accused-petitioner did not make any arrangement for enabling the complainant to appear in the examination. As the complainant did not receive his admit card for the proposed examination and failed to appear in the said HSLC examination held on 19-3-89 he asked the accused-petitioner to repay his said amount of Rs. 4000.00, but the accused-petitioner did not return the same. The accused-petitioner, according to the complainant, fraudulently and dishonestly induced the complianant to part with Rs. 4000.00 by creating in him a belief that he would be able to sit in the examination aforementioned on payment of Rs. 4000.00 and caused thereby loss to the complainant of Rs. 4000.00 and made for himself wrongful gain of Rs. 4000.00.

(3.) During trial, when a charge framed under S. 420, IPC was explained to the accused-petitioner, he pleaded not guilty thereto.