STATE OF H P Vs. MOHAN LAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS appeal by the State is directed against the judgment dated 25.11.2003 passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kinnaur at Recong Peo, whereby he acquitted the accused of having committed an offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC.

(2.) THE prosecution story in brief is that during the period from May, 1988 to October 1991, the accused was posted as a Forest Guard Chango Beat. In this capacity, he was in-charge of Chango Fuel Wood Depot of Maling Range. An audit inspection for the period from 1.4.1991 to 31.3.1993 was conducted some time in the year 1993 and as per this inspection during the period from 1.4.1991 in which the respondent-accused was in-charge of the Chango Fuel Wood Depot, he misappropriated 3,251.32 quintals of fuel wood, value of which amounting to Rs.2,21,589.75 paise. After the audit inspection, a complaint was filed and on this basis, FIR was recorded. Thereafter the matter was investigated and the accused was charged with having committed the offence aforesaid. After trial, the learned trial Court acquitted the accused. Hence this appeal by the State.

(3.) AT the outset, we may state that the entire case of the prosecution is based on the audit report. This audit was conducted in September 1993 and by that time the respondent-accused was not in Chango since he had been posted from Chango to Kotgarh in the year 1991 vide office order dated 11th October, 1991 Ext. PW-14/C, therefore, in March 1992, which is part and subject matter of the audit report, he was not in-charge of the Depot. PW-14 in cross-examination admitted that they had not enquired from whom the wood was purchased and what was the amount of the wood which was taken into possession by the respondent- accused. It also stands proved that the pages from 3 to 11 of the sale and receipt register were missing. Thereafter some additional pages were affixed with gum at Page No. 34 of the same register. There were number of cuttings and over writing in the register in question. Therefore, the possibility of some other person having pilfered the wood and making entries could not be ruled out.