KABIRAJ MURMU Vs. STATE OF ORISSA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this criminal revision the petitioner has assailed the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Jeypore, affirming his conviction and sentence for offences Under Sections 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code ('I.P.C' for short).

(2.) THE prosecution case is that the petitioner, a refuges from Bangladesh, having been rehabilitated in Malkangiri area of Koraput district, was engaged as a petty contractor under Dandakaranya Development Authority ('D. D. A.' for short) to execute minor works. For the purpose of financial transactions and encashment of cheques and bills, he had opened a current account with the Malkangiri Branch of the State Bank of India on 8 -4 -1975. On 13 -8 -1975 he received an account payee cheque (Ext. 2) for a sum of Rs. 1,257.90 for work previously executed. He committed forgery of the cheque (Ext.2) and by tampering with the figures and words contained in it, converted the cheque to be one for Rs. 20,257.90. On the following day (14 -8 -1975), he presented the cheque at the Malkangiri Branch of the State Bank of India for encashment. The cheque was encashed and the sum of Rs. 20,257.90 was deposited in his current account. On the same day he encashed a cheque for the sum of Rs. 20,250.00 from his current account and withdrew the amount. Some time thereafter the debit scroll (Ext. 3) was sent to the D.D.A. Office from the Malkangiri Branch of the State Bank of India from which, it came to light that instead of a sum of Rs. 1,257.90, which the cheque (Ext.2) represented, a sum of Rs. 20,257. 90 was encashed and drawn. Suspecting foul play, a letter dated 28 -9 -1975 (Ext.6) was written to the Investigating Officer who treated it as F. I. R. and commenced investigation and after closure thereof charge sheet was submitted against the petitioner.

(3.) THE learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Malkangiri, who tried the petitioner, believed the prosecution case and convicted him lor offences Under Sections 420 and 468, IPC, and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,500/ -on each count, in default to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months more en each count as already referred to above. The learned Sessions Judge upheld the order of conviction and sentence.