VINAYAK NARAIN NARLEKAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By these six petitions, it has been prayed that there is no progress in the trial court not even a single witness has been examined so far, therefore, these proceedings be quashed. Since common Issue is involved in all these six petitions, they are being disposed of by this common order.

(2.) The petitioner, in all these petitions, was employee of Poddar Spinning Mills since 1972. From the period Jan., 1976 to Nov., 1976, he has changed the figures of various bills and thereby dishonestly put the complainant in loss of Rs. 547.85. The details of various bills and interpolation by him in the bills of various firms are given as under:- <FRM>JUDGEMENT_93_LAWS(RAJ)8_19961.html</FRM>

(3.) Mr. Amar Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner brought to my notice the judgment of their Lordships in case of Biswanath Prasad Singh Vs. State of Bihar, [1994 SCC (Cr.) 1663] , wherein, in para 5 of the judgment, their Lordships have observed as under:-