DULAL CH BAIDYA Vs. STATE OF TRIPURA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BOTH the appeals arise out of the common judgment and order dated 27-5-2005 passed by the learned special Judge, South Trlpura, Udaipur in Case no. Special 2 of 2007 whereby and where-under the appellant in both the cases were convicted under Section 136 of the electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as 'the act of 2003') and sentenced to suffer R. I. for two years and to pay of fine of Rs. 1,000/-each, in default to suffer further R. I. for six months and as such the same were taken up together for hearing and are being diposed of by this common judgment and order.

(2.) HEARD Mr. S. Talapatra, learned senior counsel, assisted by Mr. P. Sarkar, learned counsel for the appellant in Crl. A. No. 53 of 2008 as well as Mr. P. Roy barman, learned counsel appearing for the appellant in Crl. A. No. 60 of 2008. Also heard mr. D. Sarkar, learned counsel Public prosecutor for the respondent in both the appeals.

(3.) THE prosecution case, in brief, is that one Major Kr. Deb Barma, the Senior manager, Amarpur Electrical Sub-Division, amarpur lodged a written complaint before the Officer-in-Charge of Birganj Police station, Amarpur alleging inter alia, that he sent shri Dulal Chandra Baidya Manager of the office (appellant in Crl. A. No. 53 of 2008), for collection of GI Wire along with other store materials from the Central Stores. A. D. Nagar, Agartala. In the ejahar it was also stated that though said Baidya received 485 kg. GI Wire and the some was dispatched from Central Stores, Agartala through truck bearing No. TRL-3272 on 26-7-2006, but on arrival of the truck at Amarpur on 27-7-2006, shortage of 204. 5 kg. GI wire valuing rs. 10,754. 65 was noticed. On receipt of the aforesaid First Information Report, the police registeed the same as Birganj P. S. No. 22/06 under Section 379 of the Indian penal Code and Section 136 of the Act of 2003 and started investigation. On completion of investigation, the investigating authority filed charge sheet against the accused-appellants under Section 136 of the Act of 2003. On receipt of the charge-sheet, the learned Special Judge framed charge against the accused-appellants under the aforesaid section of the Act of 2003 to which the accused-appellants pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.