VIRENDER VIKARAM SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Petitioner/accused, Virender Vikaram Singh, has come up with the present revision against his conviction recorded under Section 408 IPC by the trial Court and upheld by the appellate Court and sentence of rigorous imprisonment for two years and a fine of Rs. 1000/- imposed by the trial Court and which was reduced to one year by the appellate Court.

(2.) Brief facts are, that the accused remained posted as Project Officer in Haryana Harijan Kalyan Nigam, Ambala Cantt., from 24.8.1987 to 24.4.1989. During that period he received a sum of Rs. 1,48,225.50 for purchasing raw material and he purchased raw material only for Rs. 42,227/-; thereby criminally mis-appropriating the balance amount of Rs. 1,05,498.60 paise. The matter was reported to the government, and the Chief Secretary, Haryana ordered the registration of the FIR against him. The FIR was registered against him for the offences under Sections 409, 468 and 471 IPC. In the course of investigation the relevant documents were taken into possession and statements were recorded under Section 161 Code of Criminal Procedure After the completion of the investigation the challan was put in before JMIC, Ambala Cannt, who found sufficient grounds for presuming that the accused committed offences punishable under Sections 408 and 471 IPC. He was charged accordingly, to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. To prove his guilt the prosecution examined Jagdish Chander Chawla, Account Officer P.W. 1, Jai Pal Accountant P.W. 2, Ajit Singh H.C P.W. 3, Ranjit Singh P.W. 4, A.K. Srivastav Ex. Project Officer P.W. 5, Chaman Lal, Accountant P.W. 6, Ram Niwas Account P.W. 6/A, Raj Kumar, Enquiry Officer P.W. 7, Sultan Singh Accountant P.W. 8, Chander Singh, Retired Inspector P.W. 9, K.L. Saluja, Accounts Officer P.W. 10 and Ravi Azad DSP P.W. 11. After the evidence of the prosecution was closed, the accused was examined and his statement was recorded under Section 313 Code of Criminal Procedure The incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the prosecution evidence were put to him in order to enable him to explain the same. He denied all those circumstances and pleaded his false implication. He stated that he had not taken any advance from the Nigam and the purchases used to be made by the purchase committee, as per the orders of the higher officers, against cash. The original bills used to be submitted with the Department. All those bills were shown and after the adjustment of the amount thereof no amount was found due from him. Even ''No Due Certificate'' was obtained by him from the Nigam. In fact a sum of Rs. 65,000/- is due to him on account of the T.A bills. The accused was called upon to enter on his defence, but he did not produce any evidence in his defence. After hearing Assistant P.P for the State and Defence counsel for the accused and going through the records, the JMIC convicted the accused under Section 408 and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default thereof to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of one month. The accused preferred an appeal against that conviction and sentence. As already said above, the appellate Court maintained the conviction and reduced the sentence of imprisonment from two years to one year.

(3.) I have heard learned Counsel for both the sides.