MD ATAUR RAHMAN Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This revision has been directed against the judgment dated 5.1.1993 passed in Cr. Appeal No.83 of 1991/T.R. No. 6 of 1992, whereby and whereunder the IVthe Addl. Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi, upheld the judgment and order of conviction and sentenced passed by Sri B.K. Singh, Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Ranchi, in G.R. No. 1743 of 1987, convicting the petitioner for the offence under Section 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code and sentencing him to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for three years.

(2.) The relevant facts concerning this revision are that, the petitioner started one Scheme under the name and style of M/s. Kiran Taj Enterprises having registration No. R.S. 14117 since the year, 1982. The informant opened a pass-book in the said Scheme bearing No. B-44 and he deposited Rs. 13,867/-and besides this about 150 other persons had also opened pass-books under the said Scheme and deposited money. The Scheme of the petitioner was closed since February, 1987 and, thereafter, the informant met the petitioner, who avoided to make payment of the amount deposited by him on some pretext or the others and did not pay anything to him till 15.6.1987. It is alleged that all the per-sons, who had opened their pass-books under the said Scheme, went to the office of the petitioner to demand the money deposited by them. Whereupon the petitioner gave assurance that he would pay back the money by 30.6.1987 and when the informant went to the office of the petitioner he learnt that the petitioner had fled away and his family members did not say as to where he had gone. On the basis of the written report of the informant a case under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code was instituted against the petitioner and charge-sheet was also submitted by the police under the aforesaid counts, on the basis of which cognizance was taken in this case and the petitioner was put on trial.

(3.) The learned Magistrate framed charges under Sections 420 and 406 of the Indian Penal Code against the petitioner and convicted him under both the counts. After having found him guilty, the petitioner was awarded a composite sentence of three years, R.I. for both the counts.