(1.) This criminal revision case is filed against the judgment of the learned Metropolitan Sessions Judge, Visakhapatnam rendered in Criminal Appeal No. 134 of 1998 dated 31-3-1999 confirming the conviction and sentence passed against the petitioner accused by the learned VIII Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakha-patnam at Gajuvaka in C.C. No. 432 of 1994.
(2.) The petitioner accused was convicted by the trial Court for an offence under S. 409, IPC and sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years. He was also further sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 5,000/- in default to suffer simple imprisonment for six months. Aggrieved by the same the accused carried the matter in appeal. The appellate Court also confirmed the conviction and sentence awarded against the accused. Hence, the present revision by the accused.
(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the learned judge erred in convicting the petitioner under Sec. 409, IPC while coming to conclusion that there is discrepancy in the testimony of P.Ws. 1 and 2. He further contended that there is abnormal delay in filing the report and further contended that the Court failed to see that the ingredients of Sec. 409, IPC are not made out by the prosecution and there is any amount of doubt with regard to the quantity of property alleged to have been misappropriated by the petitioner. Therefore he contends that the order of the lower Court is liable to be set aside.