MOHAMMED HANEEFA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals arise from C.C.No.9 of 2005 of the Court of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge, Thiruvananthapuram for offences punishable under sections 13(1)(c) r/w 13(2) of the PC Act and sections 409 , 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The first and second accused who stand convicted for the above offences have preferred these appeals.

(2.) The prosecution case was that the first and second accused were working as the UD clerk and Senior Superintendent, respectively of Sree Swathi Thirunal College of Music, Thiruvananthapuram and as such, they were public servants. They were entrusted with the dominion over the Government cash and documents of that institution. While so, they entered into a criminal conspiracy and in pursuance of that conspiracy, they committed criminal breach of trust and dishonestly or fraudulently misappropriated a sum of Rs.94,660.75/- by making false entries in the cash book by not accounting the daily collection of cash in the cash book and unauthorized physical sanction of cash from the cash chest during the period 29.09.1998 to 05.04.1999. Preliminary enquiry was conducted by the Finance Officer of the Directorate of Collegiate Education. After the physical verification, he found out irregularities and also that, first accused had unauthorizedly left the institution with keys of the cash chest of the college. In the preliminary enquiry, it was suspected that, amounts were misappropriated. He recommended for an auditing. Accordingly, audit was conducted by CWs.2 to 5. A substitute cash book was prepared and on the basis of the available records, it was found that, there was a deficit of Rs.94,660.75/-. It was alleged that the first accused was dealing with the cash and the second accused, being the senior superintendent, was bound to exercise supervisory jurisdiction. Accordingly, the matter was entrusted to the Vigilance and Anti-Corruption Bureau, Thiruvananthapuram. Investigation was conducted by the DySP and after investigation, final report was laid. Accused faced trial for the above offences before the court below.

(3.) Before the court below, accused prayed not guilty. On the side of prosecution, PWs.1 to 6 were examined and Exts.P1 to P30 were marked. There was no defence evidence. The court below, on the basis of the available materials, found both the accused guilty and convicted them for offences punishable under sections 13(1)(c) r/w 13(2) of the PC Act and sections 409 and 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. They were sentenced to undergo three years rigorous imprisonment for offences punishable under sections 13(2) r/w 13(1)(d) of the PC Act and a fine of Rs.50,000/- with default sentence of rigorous imprisonment for one year each, rigorous imprisonment for three years for offence punishable under section 477A IPC with a fine of Rs.50,000/- each and in default, to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each for offence punishable under section 409 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years each for offence punishable under section 120B IPC. All the sentences were directed to undergo concurrently.