Question: One of my friends has been accused of an offence of cheating under Section 420 IPC on the ground that he fraudulently obtained admission card for an examination being conducted by the University, by proving a fake school certificate. Can it amount to an offence of cheating since no property was involved in this matter?
Answer: The facts mentioned by you are similar to a case decided by the Supreme Court, in which it was held that “admission card” of a university is covered within the meaning of “property” and that fraudulently obtaining admission can amount to an offence of cheating.
In the case of Abhayanand Mishra v. State of Bihar, AIR 1961 SC 1698, the appellant had applied to Patna University for permission to appear at the 1954 MA examination in English as a private candidate, representing that he was a graduate having obtained his BA degree in 1951 and that he had been teaching in a certain school. In support of his application, he had attached certain certificates purporting to be from the Headmaster of the School, and the Inspector of Schools. The university authorities accepted the appellant’s statements and gave permission and wrote to him asking for the remission of the fees and two copies of his photograph. The appellant furnished these and thereafter, proper admission card for him was despatched to the Headmaster of the School.
Subsequently, the University came to know that appellant was not a graduate and not a teacher. The certificates attached to the application were found to be forged. It was found that the appellant was not a graduate and was not a teacher and that in fact he had been de-barred from taking any university examination for a certain number of years on account of his having committed corrupt practice at a university examination. Accordingly, the appellant was prosecuted, inter alia, for the offence of cheating.
In these circumstances, the Supreme Court held that there was no doubt that the appellant, by making false statements about his being a graduate and a teacher, in the applications he had submitted to the University, did deceive the University and that his intention was to make the University give him permission and deliver to him the admission card which would have enabled him to sit for the MA examination. It was held that this admission card is property. It was held that the appellant would therefore have committed the offence of cheating if the admission card had not been withdrawn due to certain information reaching the University.
The Supreme Court rejected the contention that the admission card has no pecuniary value and is therefore not property. It was held that the admission card as such has no pecuniary value, but it has immense value to the candidate for the examination. Without it he cannot secure admission to the examination hall and consequently cannot appear at the examination. It was held that admission card is property.
The Supreme Court held that the the appellant had been rightly convicted of the offence under Section 420, read with Section 511 IPC (i.e., attempt to cheat).
The Supreme Court also relied upon the judgment of Madras High Court in the case of Queen-Empress v. Appasami, (1889) ILR 12 Mad 151, in which it was held that the ticket entitling the accused to enter the examination room and be there examined for the Matriculation test of the University was ‘property’; also on the judgment of Allahabad High Court in Queen-Empress v. Soshi Bhushan, (1893) ILR 15 All 210, wherein it was held that the term property in Section 463 IPC, included the written certificate to the effect that the accused had attended, during a certain period, a course of law lectures and had paid up his fees.
In view of these judgments, fraudulently obtaining an admission card for an examination may amount to the offence of cheating, depending on facts of the case.
