SAILENDRA NATH MITTER Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) These appeals are brought by Sailendra Nath Mitter and Mathuradas Purshottamdas Amin against their convictions by the Chief Presidency Magistrate of Calcutta of offences- (a) Conspiracy to commit theft under Section 120/381, Indian Penal Code; (b) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on or about 26 May 1939, and against Mitter for abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (c) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on or about 26 May 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (d) Against Amin of theft under Sec. 381 on or about 30 May 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (e) Against Amin of theft under Section 381 on or about 31 May 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (f) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on 31 May 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft on the said date under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (g) Against Amin of theft under Section 381 on or about 31 May, 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (h) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on or about 1 June 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (i) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on or about 2 June, 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code; (j) Against Amin of theft under Section 381, Indian Penal Code, on or about 2 June, 1939, and against Mitter of abetment of the said theft under Section 109/381, Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The Magistrate had preferred further charges but acquitted the two accused of the same, namely (1) criminal breach of trust under Section 408, Indian Penal Code, in respect of a sum of money of Rs. 67,804-2-0, on or about 22 May, 1939, against Amin and a corresponding charge against Mitter of abetment of the alleged criminal breach of trust and (2)1 criminal breach of trust against Amin on or about 13 June 1939, in respect of a sum of Rs. 1,22,935- 12-0 and a corresponding charge of abetment against Mitter in respect of the alleged breach of trust. Amin was at all material times the agent or branch manager of the Bank of Baroda, Ltd., at Calcutta. The Bank of Baroda, Ltd., is registered as a company in the State of Baroda where its head office is: the chief office, however, is at Bombay. The Calcutta branch was established somewhere about 1937. Amin held this appointment with a power of attorney from the bank to which reference will be made later.

(3.) The appellant Mitter is a member of a well-known Calcutta family and had at certain times considerable means. Mitter carried on business with his brother as a stock-broker in Calcutta. His brother died shortly after the happenings of the matters complained of. The brother seems to have played no part in them. In addition to his stock-broking business, Mitter was interested in various business concerns, e. g., the sale of motorcars, manufacture of bicycles and, in particular, a certain cotton mill known as the Basanti Cotton Mills in which his family had a predominant holding of the sharRs. Further Mitters, Ltd., of which Mitter was a member was the managing agent of the Basanti Cotton Mills. Mitter had personal accounts with many banks, e. g., the Central Bank of India, the Punjab National Bank, Ltd., the Netherlands Trading Society as well as the Bank of Baroda, Ltd. In addition Mitter used and operated upon the account of one D. C. Ghose, a brother-in-law of his, which the latter had with the Bank of Baroda at Calcutta. Mitter at all material times had guaranteed Ghose's account up to an extent of two lacs of rupeRs. Further Mitter appears to have been associated closely in business with one S.C. Bose who was also a stock-broker. In the charges originally before the Magistrate both D. C. Ghose and S.C. Bose were accused along with Mitter and Amin but Ghose and Bose were discharged and neither was called to give evidence by either side.