MADHUKAR VYAS Vs. RANJANBEN ASHWIN THAKKAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The original complainant has filed this Application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code, challenging the Revisional Order of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Greater Bombay, dated 19ih February, 1981, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge confirmed the order of discharge passed by the learned Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court Girgaon, dated 24th August 1979 in Case No. 54/S of 1978, against the Respondent No. 1.

(2.) The petitioner is the Secretary of the C. P. Tank Road Consumers Co-operative Society Limited, situate at Madhav Baug, Bombay-400 004. The Respondent No. 1 was an employee of the Society. It is alleged that on 28th May, 1977, Respondent No. 1 being employee of t e society was in charge of the handling of the cash, she being Cashier-cam-Clerk. The duty of Respondent No. 1 was to have custody of the cash for sale of consumer goods and receive proceeds from realisation of the same. On 28th May, 1977, she left the society along with the key of the cash box, which was to be in the custody of the Respondent No. 1. She did not return on her duty. Then the Petitioner Society issued a notice on 27th March 1978, calling upon her to explain her absence as well as making accusation against her that she has not rendered account of the sum of Rs. 5,690.82. It is alleged that this letter also was not received by the respondent No. 1 and it was returned with necessary endorsement of the postal" authorities.

(3.) The complainant petitioner, therefore, filed criminal complaint being Case No. 54/S of 1978 in the Court of the Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, 4th Court, Girgaon, Bombay, charging the Respondent No. 1, with the commission of offence under Section 408 of the Indian Penal Code. This complaint was filed somewhere in 1978. In support of that complaint, the complainant examined himself and one Accountant Narayandas. The learned Magistrate after examining the complainant and the witnesses found that the Society has failed to make out a charge against Respondent No. 1 accused. The learned Magistrate found that the witness Narayandas who was, examined to show mis-appropriation of several amounts, has relied on certain notes written by one Vasantbhai. This Vasantbhai was not examined. The learned Magistrate found that different figures were given as showing specific amount misappropriated by the Respondent No. 1. The evidence of the complainant shows that Respondent No. 1 is guilty of mis-appropriation of a sum of Rs. 4583.36. It appears that Respondent No. 1 was given remittance of the amount of Rs. 609.95 which was found in the cash box. The learned Magistrate also felt that if this amount of Rs. 609.95 is taken into account, the amount misappropriated comes to Rs. 3973.41.