STATE OF MAHARASHTRA Vs. RAMESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All these three appeals arise out of the common judgment delivered by 6th Additional Sessions Judge, Nagpur, in Criminal Appeal No. s 89/91, 95/91 and 96/91, preferred by the respondent herein, against his convictions and sentences passed in Criminal Case No. 377/1988, 378/1988 and 379/1988 by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur.

(2.) The respondent was prosecuted for the offences under section 408, 467, 468, and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code in the aforesaid three criminal cases before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur. It was mainly alleged that the respondent was working as Clerk Cum Cashier in the company - Brook Bond India, Packing Factory, Kanhan, Nagpur in the year 1973, 1974 and 1975, i. e. during the period of alleged defalcations. The period of defalcation was divided into 3 parts i. e. first from 19. 12. 1973 to 18. 12. 1974, second from 19. 12. 1974 to 18. 12. 1975 and third from 19. 12. 1975 to 31. 12. 1975. It is alleged that during this period, he was working as Clerk - Cum - Cashier in Brook Bond Indian Packing Factory, Kanhan, Nagpur. His duty was to pay the amounts on IOU Slips to the transporters for paying the relevant octroi charges. Thereafter to receive the original octroi receipts and then to pay the appropriate amount regarding each octroi payment and then to take the entry in the relevant registers including the Petty Cash Register. It is alleged that during these three periods, the respondent accused was entrusted with various amounts and he had committed defalcation of Rs. 33,119/-, 59,000/- and Rs. 24000/- in each of the periods stated above. It is also alleged that the accused has caused interpolations in the octroi receipts and thereby showed more amount paid than what was actually paid and thus the excess amount was converted by him for his own use. Therefore, it is alleged that he had forged some receipts and also did not account for the money paid to him for the payments towards the octroi receipts and he did not take the proper entries in the Petty Cash Book as well as relevant registers. Attributing criminal intent he was charge sheeted in the aforesaid criminal cases for the offences under section 408, 467, 468, and 477-A of the Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Learned trial Judge after framing the relevant charges, conducted trials. Respondent accused had denied the guilt. Evidence was recorded in one case i. e. in Criminal case No. 377/1988 for all three cases.