Conviction For Forgery and Cheating Over Bulk Bitumen Upheld; Sentence Reduced For Age and Health

A two-judge bench of Justices B.R. Gavai and Augustine George Masih heard an appeal against the Patna High Court's dismissal of an appeal challenging the conviction and sentence of the appellant under Sections 407, 420, 465 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code arising from alleged forgery, fabrication of supply documents and misappropriation of bulk bitumen consigned for the Road Construction Department, Saharsa Division.

The Court affirmed the conviction but took a lenient view on sentence. It held that the prosecution had established forgery and diversion of the consignment and that the approver's admission and supporting oral and documentary evidence left "no scope for any interference." The Court, in its reasoning, observed: “Thus, all the offences as has been alleged to have been committed by the Appellant stands established and proved beyond doubt leaving no scope for any interference.” The bench noted the appellant's advanced age, medical history and the long delay since the 1993–94 incident and reduced the sentences under Sections 407 and 420 IPC from five years to two years and six months' rigorous imprisonment while keeping fines and other sentences unchanged; all terms were directed to run concurrently. The Court also cancelled the appellant's bail bonds and directed him to surrender within four weeks.

Background A complaint by the Executive Engineer, Saharsa Division alleged that supply order No. 413(E) dated 17.01.1994 for 1,091.95 MT of bulk bitumen valued at Rs. 54,07,920 was forged and that M/s Cosmo Transport had lifted the consignment from Indian Oil Corporation, Haldia, but had not delivered it to the Road Construction Department, Saharsa. Investigation named Krishna Kumar Kedia, proprietor of M/s Cosmo Transport, as the main accused; three others were arrayed, two of whom died and one, Maheshwari Prasad, turned approver and testified as PW‑5.

At trial the prosecution relied on the approver's admission that he had fabricated and affixed signatures on authority letters and consignee receipt certificates at the appellant's instance, witnesses from M/s Cosmo Transport who proved receipt and diversion of the consignment to Alampur/Howrah, and departmental employees who established non‑receipt of the bulk bitumen at Saharsa. The judgment recorded that the approver had stated that he "had forged the signatures of Mr. MP Sinha, the Executive Engineer" and that MP Sinha (PW‑3) denied the signatures as his. The appellant contested the evidence, argued that no wrongful gain or corresponding loss to the State was proved, questioned reliance on the approver's testimony without handwriting expert evidence, and contended that consignee receipts showed delivery. The trial court convicted the appellant under Sections 407, 420, 465 and 471 IPC and sentenced him to concurrent terms (five years for Sections 407 and 420; two years for Sections 465 and 471) with fines. The Patna High Court dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court affirmed the findings of guilt, observed that no dent was created in cross‑examination of prosecution witnesses, and concluded that non‑receipt of bitumen at Saharsa and forgery were proved. Considering the appellant's age (71), medical ailments including diabetes and prior heart attacks, and the long lapse of time since the offence, the Court reduced the sentences under Sections 407 and 420 to two years and six months' rigorous imprisonment on each count, to run concurrently, left fines and default stipulations unchanged, cancelled bail bonds and directed surrender within four weeks. The appeal was partly allowed; pending applications stood disposed of.

Case Details: Case No.: Criminal Appeal No. 280 of 2019; 2025 INSC 608 Case Title: Krishna Kumar Kedia v. Union of India through Director, CBI Appearances: For the Petitioner(s): Senior Counsel (appearing; name not specified in judgment) For the Respondent(s): Additional Solicitor General (appearing for Union of India; name not specified in judgment)