CHHINDWARA SEONI KSHETRIYA GRAMIN BANK Vs. ANAKHLAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE applicant has preferred the present revision against the order dated 25.6.2005 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Seoni in criminal case No.791/1995, whereby the respondent No.1 was acquitted from the charges of offence under Sections 409, 182 read with Section 34 of IPC.

(2.) THE facts of the case, in short, are that, on 18.6.1990, the respondent No.1 Anakhlal was working as a cashier in Chhindwara -Seoni Kshetriya Gramin Bank (in short 'Bank') in Branch Badalpur, District Seoni. Since the Branch Manger Shri Rajesh Rathi went for his training, the respondent No.1 Anakhlal was incharge Branch Manager on that particular day. At about 2 -3 a.m. in the morning, when the respondent No.1 Anakhlal was in his house then, some persons came and knocked the doors. When he opened the door, a person shown a dagger to him and asked for the keys of the bank. Thereafter, they assaulted the respondent No.1 Anakhlal. Hence, he gave the keys of the bank to those culprits. They tied the respondent Anakhlal by ropes. When the respondent Anakhlal tried to shout, they again gave a threat to him not to shout. However, after the culprits left the house of the respondent Anakhlal, he dragged himself to the exterior door of the house and shouted and therefore, some villagers came and they untied the ropes and made the respondent Anakhlal free. The respondent Anakhlal immediately informed Sarpanch Munna Patel and village assistant Baghel about the incident and thereafter, they rushed to the police station Kurai and lodged the FIR, Ex.P/ 9 at 10.30 a.m. After due investigation, the investigation officer found that no robbery took place with Anakhlal. On the contrary, he misappropriated a sum of Rs.85,758/ - from the bank. After due investigation, a charge -sheet was filed against the respondent Anakhlal for offence punishable under Sections 409 and 182 of IPC.

(3.) THE respondent No.1 Anakhlal abjured his guilt. He took the defence that he was falsely implicated in the matter. Actually, the keys of the bank were robbed from him and thereafter, a theft was committed in the bank. In defence, one Mohd. Zaheer (D.W.1) was examined.