PURNA CHANDRA BEHERA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner was Convicted under Section 409, I. P. C. and sentenced to R. I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000, in default, to R. I. for six months. Out of the fine, if realised, the Kuliana Gram Panchayat (hereinafter referred to as the panchayat) was directed to get a sum of Rs. 700. In appeal, the order of conviction was maintained and so also the sentence of fine with the direction regarding payment of Rs. 700, if realised. But the sentence of imprisonment was reduced to a period of six months only.

(2.) PROSECUTION case is that, the petitioner was the Sarpanch of the Panchayat. He as a public servant committed criminal breach of trust of Rs. 3,185 from the panchayat Fund. In 1960, Government had sanctioned the construction of Women teachers quarters at Kuliana. The petitioner undertook to execute the work at Rs. 2,500. On 27th February 1960 he executed a written agreement (Ex. 3) in favour of the S. D. M. , Baripada. He received a sum of Rs. 2,400 as advanced on the very day and passed a receipt (Ext. 4 ). There was a condition in exhibit 3 that in case the petitioner failed to execute the work according to the terms of the agreement, the entire amount of the advance was recoverable with interest at 61/4 per cent per annum from the date of advance. The petitioner deposited Rs. 2,400 in the Panchayat Fund, He withdrew Rs. 3,185 on various instalments in between 29-2-1960 and 19-11-1960. Prosecution case is that the petitioner did work of the value of Rs. 212. 06 and misappropriated the balance. In his statement under section 342 Cr. P. C. the petitioner admitted that he had received Rs. 2,400 under Ex. 3. He asserted that the Resolution (Ex. 1) in the Panchayat meeting on 23rd May 1960 authorised him to draw further amounts for the construction and that no part of the resolution, an question, was subsequently interpolated. No portion of it was left blank and everything was written on the same day and at the same time. He admitted to have withdrawn Rs. 3,185 on different dates by filing receipts and that the same were entered in the cash book as and when the amount was drawn. He had constructed the building upto plinth level, collected, various materials, such as, cement, earth, morum and sand etc. , for further construction and given some advances to masons.

(3.) THE learned Sessions Judge held that no criminal breach of trust was committed an respect of the sum of Rs. 2,400. According to him, the amount was received under a contractual obligation with the stipulation that if the amount was not utilised in the construction, the same was recoverable with payment of interest. A certificate proceeding for recovery of this amount was pending. The Public prosecutor had conceded before him that there had been no criminal breach of trust in respect of this item.