No Parallel Conviction For Cheating And Criminal Breach Of Trust: Madhya Pradesh High Court

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has held that cheating and criminal breach of trust cannot be sustained together in law, while partly allowing a criminal revision petition filed by one Rameshchandra, who was convicted for duping job aspirants on the false promise of securing government employment.

In its order dated March 18, 2026, Justice Gajendra Singh upheld the petitioner’s conviction under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code but set aside his conviction under Section 406, relying on recent Supreme Court precedents clarifying that both offences cannot co-exist on the same set of facts.

The case arose from a scheme in which the accused allegedly impersonated himself as a former official of the Collectorate at Neemuch and claimed to have connections with higher authorities. Using this false identity, he persuaded multiple candidates appearing for the Combined Recruitment Test 2022 conducted by the Employees Selection Board, Bhopal, to pay large sums of money in exchange for guaranteed appointments.

According to the prosecution, six victims paid ₹2 lakh each to the accused. The total amount collected was ₹12 lakh. The FIR was registered on October 22, 2023, at Police Station Neemuch City, and after investigation, a charge sheet was filed before the trial court.

The trial court convicted the accused under Sections 420 and 406 IPC and sentenced him to three years of rigorous imprisonment on each count, along with fines. The appellate court affirmed this conviction. Challenging these findings, the accused approached the High court, arguing that there were contradictions in witness testimonies and that he had been falsely implicated due to personal grudges.

However, the High court found no merit in these submissions. It noted that all victims had consistently supported the prosecution’s case and that crucial evidence, including admit cards of the candidates, was recovered from the possession of the accused. The court observed that the concurrent findings of the trial and appellate courts were based on proper appreciation of evidence and did not warrant interference.

“The findings of the trial Court, as affirmed by the appellate Court… are based on proper appreciation of prosecution evidence and requires no interference,” the court recorded.

On the legal issue of overlapping offences, the court relied on the Supreme Court’s ruling in Delhi Race Club (1940) vs State of U.P. and Arshad Neyaz Khan vs State of Jharkhand, which clarified that the offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust are distinct and cannot be simultaneously applied in cases arising from the same transaction.

Applying this principle, the court held that while the ingredients of cheating under Section 420 IPC were clearly made out, the conviction under Section 406 IPC could not be sustained. It accordingly set aside the conviction and sentence under Section 406 IPC.

Importantly, the court underscored the gravity of the offence, particularly in the context of employment scams targeting aspirants. It observed that cheating students by promising government jobs strikes at the integrity of public recruitment systems and cannot be treated lightly.

“Cheating with students on the assurance of securing employment in public offices is a serious offence. In the present case, a lenient view cannot be adopted,” the court said.

The court further held that the sentence imposed under Section 420 IPC was proportionate to the nature of the offence and did not call for any reduction. Consequently, while the revision petition was partly allowed to the extent of setting aside the conviction under Section 406 IPC, the conviction and sentence under Section 420 IPC were maintained.

Case Title: Rameshchandra v. The State of Madhya Pradesh

Date of Order: March 18, 2026

Bench: Justice Gajendra Singh