RAM BARAN SHUKLA Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Ram Baran Shukla was rations clerk in the District Jail of Aligarh. He was charged before the Additional Sessions Judge of Aligarh. under Secs.409 and 218, Indian Penal Code, for criminal breach of trust, and for making false entries in his ledgers in order to cover up his defalcations. The learned Additional Sessions Judge found Ram Baran Shukla guilty on both charges sentenced him under Section 409 to one year's rigorous imprisonment, but did not sentence him at all under Section 218. Ram Baran Shukla appeals. The evidence against Ram Baran Shukla was in the first place a confession purporting to have been made by him and to have been recorded under Section 164, Criminal P.C., and secondly, evidence of a shortage of 37 maunds of ata, which ata was under his control, and of falsification of the accounts by him. There was also a statement by him made in the Magistrate's Court that he had made alterations in the registers and that he had done this to avoid departmental action against himself and the jailor. It is admitted that there was a shortage of 37 maunds 26 seers of ata during the months of September and October. It was admitted that Ram Baran Shukla was in charge of the ata, and it was further admitted by Ram Baran Shukla that he had falsified the accounts. The first point taken by the appellant is that the confession made under Section 164, Criminal P.C., ought not to have been admitted against him by the learned Additional Sessions Judge. It appears that this confession was made under somewhat unusual circumstances. While Ram Baran Shukla was under the control of the police he reduced his confession into writing and signed it. Thereafter he was taken before the Magistrate to record his confession under Section 164, Criminal P.C. The Magistrate warned Ram Baran Shukla according to the procedure laid down, and thereafter Ram Baran Shukla handed over the written document to the Magistrate saying: Whatever I want to state in my confession is in writing before you and is marked by you as Ex. 1. I shall say nothing beyond that.

(2.) The written confession was then read over to the accused and he stated: I have hoard this statement. It is correct. I do not want to make any alteration in it. It is in my handwriting and the signatures on it are mine.

(3.) Section 164 enacts as follows. Any presidency Magistrate, any Magistrate of the First Class and any Magistrate of the Second Class specially empowered in this behalf by the Local Government may, if he is not a police officer, record any statement or confession made to him in the course of an investigation under this chapter or at any time afterwards before the commencement of the inquiry or trial.