HARU MOHAN GHORA Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE challenge in this appeal is to the judgment dated 22.4.2010 passed by the learned Judge, Special Court No.1, Howrah thereby convicting the appellant Haru Mohan Ghora under Section 409 of the I.P.C. and sentencing him to suffer R.I. for four years with a fine of Rs.10,000/-.

(2.) ASHOKE Kr. Maity, the then Superintendent of Post Offices at Howrah Division got an information from one Gautam Chakraborty over phone that at about 11.45 A.M., Haru Mohan Ghora, a Post Man attached to Howrah Post Office sold some postal documents which ought to have been delivered to the addressees on behalf of the Postal Department to one shop located at Kali Babur Bazar, 23, K. K. Bhattacharyya Lane, Howrah. On receipt of such information over phone of one Gautam Chakraborty, Care Taker of the Howrah Head Post Office, Ashoke Kr. Maity, P.W.1 had been to the said shop located at Kali Babur Bazar and in his utter surprise found that some unregistered letters or other postal articles were being weighed in that shop. He detained the accused and informed the matter to the Howrah Police Station over phone. Police officials from Howrah Police Station reached there at 12.15 P.M. Haru Mohan Ghora was handed over to the police along with the articles. A complaint was drafted by Ashoke Kr. Maity, P.W.1 and the same was forwarded to the Police Station. The owner of the shop was also arrested. On receiving the F.I.R. from Ashoke Kr. Maity, P.W.1, Howrah Police Station Case No.147 of 2007 dated 18.7.2007 was started under Section 409/411 of the I.P.C. On conclusion of investigation into the case, charge sheet was filed against the appellant, Haru Mohan Ghora for committing offence punishable under Section 409 of the I.P.C. and against the accused No.2, Lal Chand Shaw for committing offence punishable under Section 411 of the I.P.C. The charge so framed against him under Section 409 of the I.P.C., the appellant Haru Mohan Ghora pleaded not guilty. The trial commenced and 11 witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution. Some documents, such as, F.I.R., letter of sanction, sanction order, seizure list, sketch map of the P.O. were admitted into evidence and marked exhibits on behalf of the prosecution. No witness was examined nor any document was filed in course of trial on defence side. The learned Court upon consideration of the evidence on record, oral and documentary come to a conclusion that the prosecution brought home the charge under Section 409 of the I.P.C. against the appellant, Haru Mohan Ghora and accordingly, recorded the order of his conviction and sentence which is impugned in this appeal on the following grounds;

(3.) MR. Roy, learned Counsel appearing for the appellant contended that there was no evidence whatsoever either oral or documentary to show that the articles seized under the seizure list being Ext.4 were entrusted with the appellant by the Postal Department for the purpose of distribution amongst the addressee there are. He has taken this Court to the evidence of P.W.1 and contended that P.W.1 has stated categorically that no record is being maintained for giving Post Man Postal documents for delivery to the addressees. He failed to show in his cross-examination that how many letters were delivered on that particular date and how many letters were not delivered on that particular date. From his cross-examination, it appears that there were 48 Postal Peon attached to the Howrah Main Post Office and they were supposed to distribute ordinary postal letters or documents to the addressee. The P.W.1 was not in a position to say which letter was handed over to which Peon on that date for delivery.