STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. PARVEZ FRAMROZE FARMARJI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is an Appeal filed by the State of Maharashtra under Section 378 (1) of the Criminal procedure Code (for short "cr. P. C. ") against the order of acquittal passed by the Court of additional Sessions Judge, Pune, at Pune, in criminal Appeal No. 380 of 1982, dated 15th june, 1994, whereby, the Appeal filed by the respondent herein - original accused was allowed and the order of conviction in the regular Criminal Case No. 24 of 1990 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Pune, dated 20th September, 1992, was set aside, whereby, the respondent was convicted under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code (for short "ipc") and sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for one day till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 80,000/- and, in default, simple imprisonment for three months. It was further ordered by the Chief judicial Magistrate that from the realised fine, if any, an amount of Rs. 75,000/- to be paid to the complainant, as compensation.

(2.) Shirin, wife of Firoze Irani, who is the real sister-in-law of the respondent, lodged a complaint under Sections 405, 406 and 420 of the IPC against the respondent on 23rd July, 1988, and the same was registered as Crime No. 197 of 1988. It was stated in the complaint that on 26th March, 1988, she learnt that the respondent had received US $ 50,000/- from The American Life Insurance i Company, Dubai, U. A. E. , being the Power of Attorney Holder, which was alleged to have been executed by the complainant. Respondent had also obtained signatures on various papers from her. The said amount was retained by the respondent and never submitted any accounts to the complainant. Therefore, the complainant had issued notices dated llth April, 1988, and 23rd may, 1988, and demanded the said amount and its accounts. As there was no proper explanation and reply received, the complaint in question was filed.

(3.) The charges were framed initially under Section 406 of the IPC on 7th june, 1990, and alternative charges were also framed under Section 409 of the IPC on 23rd august, 1991. Additional charge under section 420 of the IPC was also framed at the instance of the Public Prosecutor. The respondent-accused has denied the above charges.