STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Vs. PURSHOTAM DASS TADU

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 13.12.1996 of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, whereby respondent Purshotam Dass Tadu, who was charged with and tried for offence, under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code, has been acquitted.

(2.) PROSECUTION 's case is that respondent was employed as Company Commander in Home Guards, 5th Battalion, Bilaspur in the year 1991. He had been entrusted with various items of stores for use by the volunteers and other staff members of Home Guards. There was a strike by the employees of the State Government with effect from 6.8.1991 onwards. Respondent also joined that strike and locked the office. On 10.8.1991, he was called upon to handover the keys to Paras Ram Dhiman (PW -4), who had been posted as Company Commander in his place, after terminating his services. Respondent did not handover the keys and the charge of the post of Company Commander to said PW -4 Paras Ram Dhiman. Office remained closed and locked till 21.8.1991. Commandant, 5th Battalion then approached the District Magistrate seeking permission to break open the locks of the stores and to make the office functional. Permission was granted. Three locked rooms, in which store articles were available, were broken open. Inventory of the stock articles found on opening of those three rooms, was prepared. The same was compared with the entries stock register Ex.PW -10/C. Twenty items of stock were found short. A list of those items was drawn. On the basis of the shortage, it was presumed that the respondent, who was supposed to be Incharge of those articles, had misappropriated the same. So a case was got registered by the Commandant, 5th Battalion, Bilaspur against the respondent by making complaint Ex.PW -2/A.

(3.) TRIAL Court has held that entries in the stock register and the issue register have not been proved and thus neither entrustment is proved nor has it been proved as to how much stock should have been in hand at the time when the rooms were broken open. With these observation trial court has acquitted the respondent.