BHARAT SHANTILAL RAVAL Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AFTER admission of present revision application on 8. 9. 1999 and order dated 9. 9. 1999 to release the petitioner on bail, the petition does not appear to have once been attended either by the petitioner or his learned advocate. Lastly, on 7. 3. 2007, order, as under, was passed:

(2.) THE petitioner has, in effect, challenged the judgment and order of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class in Criminal Case No. 5202 of 1992 convicting him for the offence punishable under section 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short, "the IPC") and sentencing him to rigorous imprisonment of one year with fine of Rs. 3000/- and three months of simple imprisonment, in case of default; and the judgment of learned Additional Sessions Judge confirming the conviction and sentence.

(3.) ACCORDING to the petition, specific charge pertaining to entrustment of money was not framed, panchnama by which muddamal currency was recovered was not properly proved, accused was working under the command of assistant accountant and no witness had produced account dated 5. 8. 1991 to show and suggest that the amount of rupees two lakhs was misappropriated. Additional grievance about not sending the relevant documents to handwriting expert in view of section 45 of the Evidence Act is also made in the petition.