DATE: 21/02/2025
BENCH: Justice Sudhanshu Dhulia and Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra
FACTS:
The appellant served as a Traffic Superintendent at Indian Airlines, Jammu. Allegations were made that in 1997, while stationed at the ticket sale counter at Jammu Airport, he fraudulently prepared an infant ticket under a fictitious name and subsequently tampered with it by forging the flight coupon to convert it into an adult ticket. Following an investigation, the Manager (Vigilance) of Indian Airlines filed a complaint, prompting the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) to register the present case.
According to the complaint, a travel agency, M/s. Blue Bird Tours & Travel, in collusion with an individual named Rattan Chand and certain unidentified officials of Indian Airlines, Jammu, devised a scheme to procure infant tickets from the airline’s office. These tickets were then altered to reflect changes in passenger category, fare, and route—specifically, they were modified from infant to adult tickets, from shorter distances to longer distances, and from infant fares to adult fares—before being sold to various travelers.
The appellant, through his involvement in this fraudulent practice, allegedly facilitated the travel of one Vikram from Jammu to Delhi on a forged ticket. Upon being charged, the appellant pleaded not guilty and was examined under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.). However, he did not present any defense evidence to counter the allegations. After evaluating the evidence, the Trial Court found the appellant guilty of the offenses charged, and this conviction was subsequently upheld by the High Court. Dissatisfied with the verdict, the appellant sought relief by approaching the Supreme Court.
ISSUES:
The main issue in this case is whether the order of conviction passed by the High Court a valid one and whether the appellant is guilty of corrupt practices.
JUEGEMENT WITH REASONING:
The appeal is dismissed, and the conviction of the appellant under Sections 420, 468, and 471 of the Ranbir Penal Code, 1989, along with Section 5(1)(d) read with Section 5(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, is upheld. The sentences imposed by the Trial Court and affirmed by the High Court, including six months of simple imprisonment for each offense and a fine of Rs. 5,000 for each offense, shall remain in force, with all sentences running concurrently.
The conviction is based on substantial evidence, including testimonies from multiple witnesses and documentary proof. The prosecution established that the appellant, while discharging his duty as Traffic Superintendent at Indian Airlines, manipulated an infant ticket by forging its flight coupon to convert it into an adult ticket, thereby enabling unauthorized travel. The handwriting expert’s analysis, corroborated by the testimony of an officer familiar with the appellant’s handwriting, confirmed that the forged documents were created by him. Furthermore, the procedural system of ticket issuance demonstrated that the appellant alone was responsible for preparing the disputed tickets, leaving no reasonable doubt regarding his involvement.
The Court found no merit in the appellant’s arguments challenging the sufficiency of evidence. The findings of both the Trial Court and the High Court were based on clear documentary evidence and credible witness testimonies. Given the absence of any procedural irregularity or illegality in the trial process, as well as the overwhelming evidence pointing to the appellant's direct involvement in the offense, the Court saw no justification for interfering with the concurrent findings of the lower courts.
ANALYSIS:
The Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the appellant’s conviction is grounded in a meticulous examination of the evidence presented during the trial. The Court reaffirmed the principle that when findings of fact are supported by credible witness testimonies, expert opinions, and documentary proof, appellate interference is unwarranted unless a glaring procedural irregularity or miscarriage of justice is demonstrated. In this case, the appellant's role in the fraudulent modification of airline tickets was substantiated by multiple witnesses, including an expert in handwriting analysis, who confirmed that the forged documents were in the appellant’s handwriting. The procedural framework of ticket issuance further reinforced his direct involvement, as he was solely responsible for handling and altering the tickets in question. The Court thus concluded that the conviction was legally sound, and there was no ambiguity regarding the appellant’s culpability.
Furthermore, the ruling underscores the judiciary's firm stance on corruption and forgery within public service institutions. By upholding the punishment prescribed by the lower courts, the Supreme Court sent a strong message regarding the gravity of financial and procedural fraud in government-affiliated organizations. The appellant’s actions not only resulted in an unlawful monetary advantage but also caused financial losses to Indian Airlines, highlighting a broader issue of systemic fraud. The Court's decision reflects its commitment to ensuring accountability and integrity in public service by holding individuals responsible for engaging in corrupt practices. This judgment serves as a precedent that fraudulent activities in sensitive sectors like aviation will not be tolerated and will be met with stringent legal consequences.
info@adhwaitha.com
