STATE OF BIHAR Vs. S K MEHTA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE Government Appeal has been filed by the State against an order of acquittal of the six respondents passed by the learned Sessions Judge of Arrah in two Appeals, No. 489 by respondent Gopi Krishna Karan and No. 488 by the rest both of 1961, disposed of by a common judgment dated the 21st May 1962.

(2.) A Magistrate, Sri Bireshwar Sen, of Sesaram holding first class powers, had convicted all the six respondents under Section 147 of the Indian Penal Code with no separate sentence, under Section 452, I. P. C., with a sentence of detention till the rising of the court against all, and also a fine of Rs. 1000, in default, six months' rigorous imprisonment against respondent S.K. Mehta, and a fine of Rs. 300, in default, three months' rigorous imprisonment each against the rest and the four of the respondents with the exception of Dwarika Prasad Gupta and Gopi Krishna under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code with no separate sentence, having acquitted all of them under Section 355, I.P.C., and Mehta under Section 148 I.P.C. 2a. The State had filed a Criminal Revision. No. 262 of 1981 for enhancement of the sentences, but on the acquittal of the respondents, it was dismissed by the same judgment. 2b. There was a counter case filed by respondent Mehta against eight accused including some of the prosecution witnesses of the case giving rise to the Government Appeal. It was tried by the same Magistrate who, by a judgment of the same date acquitted all the eight accused of all the charges and Mehta filed a Criminal Revision No. 295 of 1961 before the Sessions Judge. It was dismissed by an Additional Sessions Judge by his order dated the 21st August 1962. Mehta has since filed before this Court Criminal Revision No. 1123/1962.

(3.) THE facts of the case giving rise to the Government Appeal, briefly stated, are as follows: THEre is one Rohtas Industries Ltd., at Dalmianagar within Dehri police station, two miles north of it in the district of Shahabad. Sri Vishnu Prasad Poddar (P. W. 11) was, during the relevant period, the Works Manager and, practically, the administrative head of the firm. S.K. Mehta, Respondent No. 1, was the Establishment Officer, and the other respondents were holding inferior posts on the firm. Mehta was in charge of the guest house and conveyances. THEy were all subordinate to Sri Poddar.