BABU DCRUZ Vs. THE STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The revision petitioner is the accused No. C.C. No. 87 of 2008 on the files of the Chief Judicial Magistrate's Court, Thiruvananthapuram. He was prosecuted for the offences punishable under Secs.403 and 409 of the Indian Penal Code. After trial, the learned Magistrate found the revision petitioner guilty of the said offences, alleged against him, and convicted thereunder. He was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment till rising of the court and also to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/ - under Sec.403 of the Indian Penal Code and Rs. 10,000/ - under Sec. 409 of the Indian Penal Code and in default of payment of fine, to undergo simple imprisonment for 45 days under Sec.403 of the Indian Penal Code and three months imprisonment under Sec.409 of the Indian Penal Code respectively. Though, he had preferred Crl. Appeal No. 263 of 2011 before the Additional District & Sessions Judge -VI, Thiruvananthapuram, the learned Sessions Judge, after re -appreciating the evidence on record, concurred with the findings of the learned Magistrate and confirmed the conviction entered and the sentence imposed on the revision petitioner, as such, without any interference. The legality and correctness of the concurrent findings of conviction and sentence are under challenge in this revision petition.

(2.) The prosecution case, in brief, is as follows: The accused, while he was working as a Clerk in the Law College Hostel, Thiruvananthyapuram, from 17/12/1998 to 17/3/1999, he collected mess fees and hostel fees from the hostel inmates and for which he in lieu of receipt books in Sl. No. 64 and 65, took receipt book No. 69 from the hostel office and issued receipts therefrom to the inmates and then he has not remitted the collected hostel fees and mess fees under the said receipt books, in the Treasury, and not made the corresponding entries in the relevant records and thus, the said amount was dishonestly misappropriated and thereby, made criminal breach of trust to the Government and P.W.2.

(3.) To prove the prosecution case, 22 witnesses were examined as P.Ws.1 to 22 and Exts.P1 to P20 were marked. The accused pleaded not guilty of the said offences and D.W.1 was examined and Ext. D1 was marked from his side. After evaluating the aforesaid evidence, the courts below concurrently found that the prosecution has succeeded in proving the charge of misappropriation and criminal breach of trust against the petitioner/accused.