D C NANJAPPA Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal by certificate is directed against the decision of the High Court of Mysore in Criminal Appeal No. 124 of 1966 on its file wherein the High Court reversed the order of acquittal of the appellant under Sections 409 and 467, I.P.C. entered in by the trial court convicted him of those offences and sentenced him to suffer 18 months rigorous imprisonment under each of those charges. But the two sentences were ordered to run concurrently.

(2.) In December 1962, the appellant was a school teacher as well as branch post-master at Dadighaita village of Channarayapatna Taluk. The prosecution case is : That P.W.8 who hails from Dadighatta but working as a Jutka driver in Bombay sent on December 20, 1962 a sum of Rs. 60/- through an insured cover to his father, P.W 10. That cover was received at Dadighatta on the 24th of that month but the appellant instead of delivering the same to P.W.10 misappropriated the amount placed in that cover and sent back the acknowledgement slip (Ex P-2) after forging the thumb impression of P.W.10 therein. That was duly received by P.W.8 through the Byculla post-office. After sometime P.Ws.8 and 10 came to know that the money sent by P.W.8 under the insured cover (Insured Cover No. 26) had not been received by the addressee. Therefore they laid a complaint with the postal authorities. That complaint was entrusted to P.W.11 for enquiry. In that connection he questioned the appellant on' January 14, 1963 when the appellant made a confession to him stating that because of his financial difficulties be had misappropriated the amount and forged the thumb impression of PW10 in Ex P.12. On the same day he produced before P.W.11 the insured cover Ex P.1 which bears the postal seals of Byculla as well as Dadighatta and the same was taken in possession by P.W.11. Latter on the forged acknowledgement slip (Ex-P-2) sent to P.W 8 was secured. That acknowledgment slip also bears the postal seals of Dadighatta as well of Byculla.

(3.) The prosecution has examined four witnesses to establish the despatch of insured cover from Byculla post-office in Bombay. There is the evidence of P.W.8, the sender of the insured cover and that of P.Ws. 1, 2 and 3, officials of the postal department who were working in Byculla post-office at the relevant time For proving the receipt of the said cover at Channaryapatna on December 22, 1962, the prosecution examined P.Ws. 4 and 5, the officials of postal department who were working in Channarayapatna post office at that time. The receipt of the cover in question at Dadighatta on December 24, 1962 is sought to be Droved by Ex.P-10, the daily account register maintained by the appellant at Dadighatta, Ex.P-10 (a) is said to be the relevant entry in the handwriting of the appellant. Ex.P-12 is the branch office journal and Ex.P.12 (a) is said to be the entry relating to the receipt of Ex.P-1. P.W. 4 deposed to the fact that Ex.P10 (a) and P 12 (a) are in the handwriting of the appellant. He claims to know the handwriting of the appellant. The prosecution further sought to prove its case by proving Ex.P-25, the confession said to have been made by the appellant. To prove that that confession was voluntarily made, the prosecution examined P.Ws.11, 12 and 13. P.Ws. 12 and 13 are Panchayatdars who were said to have been present at the time of the confession. The prosecution sought to prove by the evidence of thumb impression expert as well as the handwriting expert that the thumb impression found on Exh.P-2 is that of the appellant and the attesting signatures found thereon also is in the handwriting of the appellant.