Answer
Valuable Security
(a) any legal rights is (i) created (ii) extended (iii) transferred (iv) restricted
(v) extinguished, or (vi) released
(b) any person acknowledges that he (i) lies under legal liability, or (ii) has not certain right
Illustration
‘A’ writes his name on the back of a bill of exchange. As the effect of this endorsement is to transfer the right to the bill to any person who may become the lawful holder of it, the endorsement is a valuable security’.
Judgment
According to a judgment, a vakalatnama does not in the face of it purport to create, extend, transfer, restrict, or extinguish a right and as such it cannot be deemed to be a valuable security within the meaning of this Section. (1970 DLC 794)
Distinction between ‘Document’ and ‘Valuable security’
'Document’ is the genus of which ‘Valuable Security’ is species. All valuable securities are documents but all documents re not valuable securities. It is only those kinds of documents which relate, transfer, etc. any Legal right that are termed ‘Valuable securities’.
2. Dishonestly:
S. 24 describes that whoever does anything other the intention of causing wrongful gain to one person or ‘wrongful Loss to another person, is said to do that thing ‘dishonestly’. leer doing of something with the intention to cause wrongful gain r wrongful loss to another in sufficient and it is not necessary that ‘wrongful gain or wrongful loss should be caused.
A person is said to act dishonestly when he does anything with is intention of causing:
(i) wrongful gain to one person, or
(ii) wrongful loss to another.
Wrongful gain is gain by unlawful means of property to which the person gaining is not legally entitled and wrongful loss is the loss unlawful means of property to which the person losing is legally flitted.
Wrongful means prejudicial affecting a party in some legal get. The words by ‘Unlawful means are intended to refer to an act which would render the doer liable to an action or prosecution.
For instance, C, by exhibiting to D a false sample of an article, intentionally deceives D, into believing that the article corresponds with the sample, and thereby causing wrongful loss to D by inducing him to buy and pay for the article. Thus C causing wrongful gain commits ‘dishonestly’.
3. Fraudulently: (S. 25 of PPC).
A person is said to do a thing fraudulently if he does that thing with intent to defraud but no
otherwise.
4. Difference between Dishonestly and Fraudulently:
The former involves two conceptions, deceit and injury to the person deceived the latter denotes only an intention to deceive the expression fraudulently implies an intention to deceive and it need not necessarily be Dishonest, though it is generally so. The expression dishonestly that the restricted meaning of causing wrongful gain or loss. The word ‘defraud’ does not necessarily import deprivation of property, actual or intended, as a part of the fraud. By defrauding a person may get some advantage, but it does not imply necessarily deprivation or intend deprivation of property.
A general intention to defraud without the intention of causing wrongful gain or loss to a person would be sufficient to support a conviction.
For example, a person, who uses a false certificate with the intention of being permitted to appear at examination, but for which he could not have appeared, acts fraudulently.
Difference between Intention and Motive:
Intention: The law takes into accounts only a man’s intention and not his motive.
Motive: By motive is meant anything that can contribute to give birth to, or even to prevent any kind of action. It is detected to the ultimate end, good or had which a person hopes to secure.
As defined in the Black’s Law Dictionary “motive’ is the moving course, the impulse, the desire that induces criminal action on part of the accused; it is distinguished from “intent” which is the purpose or design with which the act is done. Motive in criminal cases is not always material and its weakness would not damage the
credibility of the prosecution case if direct ocular evidence is sufficiently available to prose the guilt of the accused person. (1998 P.Cr.L.J 530)
Law ignores the motive:
The law ignores the motive. A person may act from a laudable motive, but if he intentionally causes wrongful loss, his crime is complete, irrespective of motive.
Sufficient Test:
The motive for an act is not a sufficient test to determine its criminal character. Though the motive for an. Ct may be pure, the act done under it may be criminal.
And ‘an act is intention if it exists in idea before it exists in fact, the idea releasing itself in the first because concerned with the immediate effects of his acts.
The Live takes into account only a man’s intention and not his motive the law ignores the motive. A person may act from a laudable move. But if he intentionally causes wrongful loss, his crime is c, complete,Irrespective of his motive. The motive for an act is nu a sufficient lest to determine its criminal character. Through the notes’ tor an act may be pure; the act done under it may be criminal.
Difference between “Intention” and “Motive’:
A difference exists and must be made between a man’s intention and motive. The law takes an account only a man’s intention and not his motive. Motive is directed to the ultimate end, good or bad, which a person hopes to secure, his intention is concerned with the immediate affects on his acts
A man’s motive for an act consists in a desire for something which will a real or imagined benefit of some kind or the actor himself whereas his intention need not relate to some personal interest of this kind.
An intention relates.to the immediate objectives of an act, which a motive relates to the object or series of objects for the sake of which the act is done. The immediate intent of the thief is to appropriate another person’s money.