Bhanwarilal Jhunjhunwala v. Union of India (AIR 1963 SC 1620)

Issues

• Should cheating charges be framed separately per bill, or as a single charge for the entire fraudulent transaction?
• Can a court trying Section 120-B conspiracy also try all related offences even if some occurred outside its territorial jurisdiction?

Rules

• Acts are distinct offences only if they are not interrelated. If several acts are tied to one scheme to obtain the full sum, they form one cheating offence.
• A court trying conspiracy (120-B) is competent to try all acts done in execution of that conspiracy, even beyond local limits.
• Section 233 CrPC does not force multiple charges where conduct amounts to a single offence.

Arguments

Judgment (Supreme Court)

• Multiple bills were interlinked steps in one design to cheat; hence a single 420 IPC charge was valid.
• A court trying conspiracy can try all connected offences despite territorial limits.
• Partners in the fraudulent firm were jointly liable for the dishonest receipt.
• The Special Judge, Poona, could validly amend charges; restoring cheating to the entire ₹3,77,771 was proper.
• Accused appeals dismissed; Union’s appeal allowed; cheating charge restored to the full amount.

Ratio Decidendi

Where acts are integral to one plan, they form a single cheating offence. In a 120-B conspiracy, jurisdiction follows the conspiracy locus, covering all acts done for it, even beyond territory.

Why It Matters

• Stops artificial splitting of one fraud into many charges.
• Gives clear rule on conspiracy jurisdiction for complex, multi-state schemes.
• Supports efficient trials while keeping the accusation intact.

Key Takeaways

1. One plan → one offence (420 IPC), even if many bills.
2. 120-B lets the court try all acts of the scheme across borders.
3. Charge tweaks allowed if they don’t change the core accusation.

Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook

Mnemonic: “One Scheme, One Charge” — OSOC.

1. One Scheme: See the design, not just bills.
2. One Charge: Treat as single 420 offence.
3. Conspiracy Court: Tries all acts, even outside territory.

IRAC Outline

Issue: (i) Separate 420 charges for each bill or one? (ii) Can conspiracy court try extra-territorial acts?

Rule: Interrelated acts under one design = one offence; conspiracy jurisdiction covers all acts in execution.

Application: Bills were steps to obtain entire contract money; conspiracy linked acts across places.

Conclusion: Single cheating charge valid; conspiracy court had competence; full amount restored.

Glossary

Section 420 IPC

Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.

Section 120-B IPC

Criminal conspiracy—agreement to commit an offence or illegal act.

Section 233 CrPC

Relates to separate charges; not required where acts form a single offence.

FAQs

Related Cases