MOHAMMAD ASLAM Vs. STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Some exceptions disprove the rule, Cases are legion where the proverbial proposition of litigative finality at the High Court level on findings of fact has been affirmed by this Court, but the exceptions which prove the rule are also well-established.

(2.) We must at the outset State that this case does not fit into the conventional legal mould but, nevertheless, possess such strange features that our 'ultimate' power may legitimately come into play.

(3.) A petty store-keeper-cum-chashier in a rural block development office (in the district of Shahjehanpur) was charged with misappropriation of several sums adding up to a little over Rs. 5,000/-. The charges having been denied and the real culprit having been pointed out as the boss of the block development office, the Sessions Court received evidence on both sides, found the testimony of the Block Development Officer (BDO, acronymically) 'completely false and unbelievable' in regard to many of the items of embezzlement and made critical observations about his culpability in respect of many of the malversations. We may have something to say about the not unusual phenomenon of the small fry getting caught, and the big shark breaking through the net in economic offence where public money is handled by public servants. For the nonce we may content ourselves with the statement that the little official in his twenties - which the accused was - was acquitted of all but one charge and the misappropriation of Rs. 5,194.82 dwindled into a solitary fugitive item of Rs. 50/- for which he was punished with imprisonment for one year and a fine of Rs. 300/-. the conviction was confirmed but the sentence was reduced by the High Court.