DALICHAND JAIN AND ORS. Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS Criminal Revision Petition arises out of the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 08.01.2007 in C.A. No.10 of 1999 on the file of the II Additional Sessions Court, Puducherry, confirming the judgment of conviction and sentence dated 29.12.1998 in C.C. No.258 of 1996 on the file of the Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Pondicherry.

(2.) FOR the sake of convenience, the petitioners herein are referred to as A3 to A7. The case of the prosecution is as follows:

(3.) CHALLENGING the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by both the Courts below, the learned counsel for the petitioners submits that order of termination has not been communicated to A3 to A7, who are partners of A2. No meeting was convened and no evidence to show that A1 has intimated the same to A3 to A7. It is further submitted that findings of both the Courts below is only based on suspicion than on proved facts and the conviction cannot be on the basis of inference. Hence, he prayed for setting aside the judgment of conviction and sentence passed by both the Courts below. To substantiate his arguments, he relied upon the decision of the Apex Court reported in : (2003) 11 SCC 207 (State (Andaman and Nicobar Admn.)) v. Shyam Raj).