(1.) THESE two appeals arose from the common judgment of the Enquiry Commissioner and Special Judge (Vigilance), Thrissur in C.C. No. 24 of 2002 and C.C. No. 25 of 2002. The appellant is the same in these two appeals. He was a Peon in the Sub Registrar's Office, Vazhoor during 1995 -1996. On the allegation that, he committed dishonest misappropriation of an amount of Rs. 65,463/ - from public funds, without making remittance in the Sub Treasury as entrusted and directed by the Sub Registrar, and that for making the Sub Registrar believe that he had made remittance, he created false remittance challans showing remittance of Rs. 65,463/ -, the appellant faced prosecution on two final reports submitted by the Vigilance and Anti Corruption Bureau (VACB), Kottayam before the trial court. The VACB registered a crime against two persons including the petitioner herein, on the complaint of the then Sub Registrar who detected the dishonest misappropriation and forgery committed by the Peon. As regards the misappropriation made from 23.5.1995 to 31.12.1996, the VACB submitted final report as 'A' charge on which the learned trial Judge took cognizance as C.C. 24 of 2002, and as regards the dishonest misappropriation committed during 18.6.1996 to 3.7.1996, the VACB submitted 'B' charge, on which the trial court took cognizance as C.C. 25 of 2002. The oral and documentary evidence in the two cases being common, the learned trial Judge tried the two cases jointly, and common evidence was recorded. As against the other accused arraigned in the crime, the VACB submitted separate final report.
(2.) THE accused appeared before the trial court in the two cases and pleaded not guilty to the charge framed against him under Sections 13(2) read with Sections 13(1)(c) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (for short "the P.C. Act") and under Sections 409, 465 and 471 of I.P.C.
(3.) CRL . A No. 1675/2006 is the appeal brought against the judgment of conviction in C.C. No. 24 of 2002 and Crl. A No. 1677 of 2006 is the appeal brought against the judgment of conviction in C.C. 25 of 2002.