M S GANESAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BETWEEN 10-2-1950 and 25-10-1950 the petitioner was the executive officer of Smt Valeeswaraswami temple, Arlyalur. The case against him was that between these two dates he committed criminal breach of trust in respect of sums amounting to Rs. 1072-2-0 belonging to the temple. The learned Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Musiri, convicted the petitioner under Section 409, I, P. C. and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year and to pay a fine of Us. 1,000. However in the charge which he framed the Sub-Divisional Magistrate did not, set out the total amount of the money which the petitioner is said to have misappropriated. It was argued in appeal before the learned Sessions Judge of Tiruchirapalli that the petitioner was prejudiced by reason of this omission; of the Magistrate and that the conviction must therefore be set aside. The learned Sessions Judge found that the omission had not in any manner prejudiced the petitioner and in that view he confirmed the conviction and sentence. The petitioner has therefore come to this Court.

(2.) MR. Narayanaswaml Mudaliar the learned Counsel for the petitioner rested his principal contention on Section 222 (2) Cr. P. C. which enacts:

(3.) THIS sub-section, he argued, requires the court to specify not merely the dates between which the misappropriation or breach of trust is said to have been committed but also the aggregate amount in respect of which the offence is said to have been committed and that therefore the omission to specify the amount is fatal to the prosecution. But along with Section 222 (2), Cr. P. C. one must read Section 225 which runs thus: