HIRA LAL Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HIRA Lal, the petitioner herein, was convicted by learned Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Rewari vide judgment dated 18.4.1987 under Section 409 IPC for committing an offence of criminal breach of trust in respect of an amount of Rs. 3200/- by misappropriating the same in his capacity as a public servant. He was sentenced to undergo RI for one year and to pay a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to further undergo RI for one month. An appeal was preferred by the petitioner and the same also stands dismissed vide impugned judgment dated 7.3.1989 of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Narnaul. Hence this revision.

(2.) THE present revision was filed by one Mr. Raj Kamal Swan, Advocate in 1989. When it was taken up for its final disposal on 23.10.2002 none had appeared for the petitioner. It was adjourned to 27.11.2002. On that date also no one had appeared for the petitioner and notice was given to the counsel for the petitioner for 8.1.2003. So was the position on the said date and a fresh notice was sent for 5.3.2003. Since the service was not effected another notice was sent for 2.7.2003. As per the office report, the notice sent to the counsel was received back unserved with the report that the counsel for the petitioner was not found present in the Bar room. Actual date notice was then issued to the petitioner to either appear personally or engage some counsel for 13.8.2003. Since the notice was not received back served or otherwise a fresh notice was once again sent to the petitioner on the address given in the opening sheet for today. Office report now submitted is that the notice issued to the petitioner for today i.e. 28.1.2004 has been received back unserved with the report that the petitioner has refused to receive the copy of the summons without the copy of the case. The report further indicates that the copy of the case was not sent with the notice as Hira Lal is the petitioner himself. I take it as a proper service upon the petitioner. As the present petition relates to the year 1989 being a very old one and cannot be adjourned time and again, I am disposing it of on merits without any assistance being rendered from the side of the petitioner.

(3.) THE petitioner was working as M.O. Paid Clerk in Post Office at Rewari. Some complaints were received that certain payees of money orders had not received money of their money orders. After receiving the complaint, Inspector of Post Offices Chander Bhan Garg held an enquiry and it was found that money orders detailed below were not paid :-