SARDA SARAN Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a criminal revision from a conviction under Section 420 of the Indian Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The applicant Sarda Saran was a temporary clerk at Lucknow, and took leave from the 23 of January 1923 till the 31 of January of that year. While he was on casual leave he went to Cawnpore and was appointed a permanent Head Clerk of the Cawnpore Cantonments by a Temporary Cantonment Magistrate. He applied to the Lucknow Authorities for an extension of his leave but originally this leave was not granted. It is not disputed that his casual leave expired on 31 of January 1923. On the 2 February, 1923 he had been informed that he was ineligible under the rules for a permanent appointment.

(3.) Captain Pocock, prosecution witness No. 3, states that he told the accused that he could not consider his retention in the Cantonment Magistrate's Office, whereon the accused informed him that he had resigned his post in the Military Accounts Department, and that it would entail considerable loss to him if he did not retain him. He even offered to accept the position of an apprentice clerk. The witness goes on to say that as he could not retain him in his office, he thought it fit and proper to give him a month's pay in lieu of notice, and adds that he was induced to do so on account of the representation made to him by the accused.