STATE Vs. JUGAL KISHORE NANDA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the Government is filed again, at the acquittal of the respondent Jugal Kishore Nanda who was tried by the Assistant Sessions Judge. Bhawani Patna on charges under Sections 409. 477-A and 467 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) THE respondent was the money order is sue clerk of Bhawani patana Sub-Post Office in the month of May 1952. According to the prosecution case, the total amount of money orders collected by the respondent on 5-5-52 in his capacity as the money order issue clerk at the counter was Rs. 5310/9/-, but he gave credit of only Rs. 5207/1/7 and misappropriated the balance of Rs. 103/8/ -. It is stated that with a view to conceal this misappropriation the respondent forced the head office copy of the original money order receipt No. 4179 (Ext. 15a) which was prepared in pen carbon process in triplicate by the respondent by mentioning therein receipt of Rs. 300/- for remittance, though the original receipt No. 4179 (Ext". 13) which is in the hand of the respondent and which relates to Behara Branch Office money order receipt No. 13 dated 3-5-52 mentions the amount received for remittance as Rs. 400/ -. The respondent is alleged to have altered and falsified the audit office copy, the head office copy and the office copy of money order issue journal of that date relating to relevant money order receipt No. 4179 which were prepared by the respondent' under the rules in triplicate by mentioning that the amount received for remittance was Rs. 300/- (exts. 16a. 18a and 17a ). It is also stated that he altered and falsified the last pages of the head office copy (Ext. 17) and the office copy (Ext. 18) of money order issue journal of that date, namely, 5-5-52 by showing the total amount of money order received by him at the counter to be Rs. 5207/1/-though in fact the total amount received was Rs. 5310/9/ -. Next it is alleged that on 225-62 the respondent received at the counter Rs. 1018/4/- but credited only an amount of Rs. 1008/4/-thus misappropriating the balance of Rs. 10/~ and that with a view to conceal this misappropriation he forged the head office copy of the money order receipts Nos. 3657 and 3658 dated 22-5-52 (Exts. 9 and 9a) showing receipt of Rs. 120/-for remittance under each, though as a matter of fact the original receipts (Exts. 7 and 7a) which are in the hand of the respondent and relate respectively to Kesinga Branch Office money order receipts Nos. 30 and 31 dated 21-5-52, show receipt of Rs. 125/- under each for remitance. As a consequential step, the respondent is alleged to have altered and falsifled the head office copy, the office copy and the audit "office copy of money order issue journal of that date relating to the relevant money order recipts Nos. 3657 and 3658 (Exts. 11a and 11b in the head office copy" of the money order issue journal, Exts. 12a and 12b in the office copy of the money order issue journal and Exts. 10a and 10b in the audit office copy of the money order issue journal ). In both the head office copy and the audit office copy of the money order issue journal of that date relating to the two relevant money order receipts Nos. 3657 and 3658 the amount mentioned to have been received under each for remittance is Rs. 120/- while in the audit office copy the amount mentioned to have been received under each is Rs. 125/ -.

(3.) THESE offences, it is stated, came to light when the payees of the money orders issued from Behara Branch Office and Kesinga Branch Office did not receive the money order amounts and consequently complaints were made by the remitters of the said money orders. P. W. 4, the Inspector of Post Offices enquired into the master and loded the F. I. R. at Bhawanipatna Police Station (Ext. 19 ). The chargesheet was submited on 26-11-52 against the respondent under Section 409 I. P. C. and he was tried by a Magistrate, First Class. Shri P. G. Mchanty. After framing charges against the respondent under Sections 468 and 409 I. P. C. , the trying Magistrate convicted the respondent under. both the sections and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months and to pay a fine of Rs. 100 with rigorous imprisonment for one month in default, under Section 409 I. P. C and no separate sentence was passed under Section 468 I. P. C. The respondent appealed against this conviction and sentence to the Sessions Judge of Balangir-Patna who pet aside the convictions of the respondent on both the charges under Sections 468 and 409 I. P. C. and remanded the case to the trying Magistrate with directions fo the effect that a charge under Section 477-A I. P. C. should be framed; that the prosecution should be given a chance to prove, if possible, whether the accused with intent to defraud falsified account papers; and that the accused also should be given an opportunity to explain his conduct after footing into the original documents. After remand the case came up before another Magistrate who converted the proceeding to one of enquiry under Chapter XVIII of the Criminal Procedure Code and commited the case to sessions. The respondent pleaded not guilty to all the charges.