P.JAGADEESHA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner herein was the accused in the Court of the Civil Judge (Jr.Dn) & Additional JMFC at Ramanagaram (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'trial Court'), who was convicted for the offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter for brevity referred to as ' IPC '). He preferred an appeal in the Court of learned District and Sessions Judge, Ramanagara (hereinafter for brevity referred to as 'Court of Appeal') in Criminal Appeal No.2/2007, which by its impugned judgment dated 5.3.2011 initially pronounced an order of partly allowing the appeal, however, by a correction of the operative portion of the judgment vide its correction order dated 18.4.2011 made the appeal as dismissed. It is against the said judgment of confirmation of conviction and order on sentence, the accused has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) The summary of the charge leveled against the accused was that, being the Head Cashier in the State Bank of Mysore, Ramanagara Branch, the accused was entrusted with cash of Rs.37,72,500/- on 1.2.1997. On the same day, at about 1.10 pm., during the business hours, the accused without informing his superior officers, had left the bank unauthorizedly taking a cash of Rs.2,94,940/- with him out of the said entrusted amount, for his own use and has misappropriated the said sum and thereby has committed the offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC.

(3.) The accused pleaded not guilty. As such, the trial was conducted, wherein the prosecution in order to prove the alleged guilt against the accused examined 9 witnesses from PWs.1 to 9, got marked documents from Exs.P1 to P4(a) and Material Objects from MOs.1 to MO.8. From the accused side, neither any witnesses were examined nor any documents were marked as exhibits. After hearing both side, the trial Court by its impugned judgment of conviction and order on sentence dated 5.5.2006 convicted the accused for the offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC and sentenced him accordingly. His appeal before the Court of Appeal also came to be dismissed as observed above.