JOGINDER SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) BY this common order, I propose to dispose of three Criminal Revisions i.e. 595, 671 and 618 of 1987, as the question of law is same in all of them. The facts are being taken up from Crl. R.No. 595 of 1987.

(2.) THE revisionist was a member of the Co-operative Marketing Society, Ajnala and was supposed to deal with the accounts of the sale packages of fertilizers entrusted to him. There was a charge of embezzlement of certain amount. A report of this effect was made nearly 25 years ago. In the three cases, the amount involved was less than Rs. 1,00,000/- in all. However, after the trial the revisionist was convicted under Section 408 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of Rs. 3000/- and in default of payment of fine, the accused shall further undergo rigorous imprisonment for six months. The appellate court awarded one year's rigorous imprisonment to the accused under Section 477-A IPC. The trial Court ordered all the sentences to run concurrently.

(3.) THE other part of the evidence was examined in the case. The prosecution had not been able to bring sufficient evidence to prove that the fertiliser bags in question were actually sold, unless there is definite evidence that the fertiliser bags were actually sold, the officers concerned with the sale of the deposit of the money would not be charged to that effect. The trial as well as the lower appellate court has tried to observe that it was for the revisionist to prove that the fertiliser bags were not sold. However, such as observation is not correct. Therefore, this Court is of the view that such an old case at this stage could not be remanded so as to again record a statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. when the proceedings are pending for the last 25 years.