CHAKRADHAR PRADHAN Vs. ARUN KUMAR PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Having been convicted by the Courts below of the charges under Sections 408 and 477-A, Indian Penal Code, and sentenced thereunder, the petitioner has moved this Court in revision challenging the order of conviction and sentence.

(2.) The case was initiated on the complaint filed by the opposite parties, the Secretary, Service Co-operative Society Ltd., Kadaligarh and the President of the said Society respectively, alleging inter alia that the petitioner as the Secretary of the said Society had, during the period from 1-7-1975 and 30-6-1976, collected a sum of Rs. 5635.95 from different members by issuing receipts to them, but had not taken the amount into the accounts of the Society, [details whereof were furnished in Schedule 'A' to the complaint petition ; that the petitioner misappropriated a sum of Rs, 1162.70 by showing amounts as collected from different members in the Loan Register on different dates for which he issued no receipts and did not take the amounts into the accounts of the Society, the details of which were contained in Schedule 'B' to the complaint petition ; that during the aforementioned period the petitioner had shown advancement of loans to members of the Society to the tune of Rs. 2650/- though in fact he did not advance any such loan and the details of these amounts were furnished in Schedule 'C' to the petition. It was also alleged that the petitioner misappropriated the amount of Rs. 60.40, the sate proceeds of the pesticides, on different dates and Rs. 420.90 towards purchase of two bags of sugar which he had not accounted for in the accounts of the Society. Thus the petitioner was alleged to have committed criminal breach of trust to the tune of Rs. 10,281.69 and also stood charged under Section 477-A, I. P. C. for falsification of accounts.

(3.) The plea of the petitioner was one of denial. He denied to have been in charge of either cash or accounts of the Society. According to him, it was the President of the Society (P. W. 23) who was in overall charge of the Society and he had misappropriated the amounts in question.