GANESH PRASHAD Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case the two petitioners, one Gopal Prasad and the other Deo Narain Lal, have been tried and convicted for an offence under Section 408, I.P.C.

(2.) The substance of the charge against Ganesh Prasad was that on 26th September 1930, he misappropriated a sum of Rs. 100 in that he entered that sum in the books of account of the firm by which he was employed but that he did not pay over that sum to his employer. The second item of charge was that on 9th May 1931, a sum of Rs. 2-15-6 was received from a customer on account of a tin of petrol, but there was no entry in the books and no payment over to his employer. The third item was a sum of Rs. 10-9-6 received from a Miss Murray on 25 May 1931, and again not paid over to his employer. In the case of Deo Narain Lal there were two items: one of Rs. 5 on 10 November 1930, which was a balance of a sum of Rs. 157 alleged to have been received from a shopkeeper and only Rs. 152 was entered in the books of the firm, the second item being Rs. 10 on 16 March 1931, which represented the value of five petrol drums which had been received and not accounted for by Deo Narain Lal.

(3.) The point which is advanced on behalf of the petitioners is that there has been a misjoinder of charges and mistrial in that the two petitioners should not have been tried together. The misjoinder of charges arises in this way according to the argument. The second and third items, if the prosecution case is to be believed against Ganesh Prasad, represent criminal misappropriation, but it is contended that all that the evidence with regard to the first item discloses is a falsification of the books. The facts, as I have stated, were that Rs. 100 were entered in the books but not received by the employer.