SATISH CHANDRA SEAL Vs. EMPEROR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Six persons, namely Satis Chandra Seal, Sudhir Kumar alias Dulo Bose and Brojendra Nath Alias Cheton Mitra being the three appellants in Appeal No. 109 of 1943 and Charubala Dassi being the appellant in Appeal No. 130 of 1943 and Surendra Nath Mitra and Beni Madhab Moulik were put upon their trial on a variety of charges before the Additional Sessions Judge of Khulna. The appellant Satis was charged under Section 409, Indian Penal Code, or alternatively under Section 52, Post Office Act. He was unanimously found guilty, by the jury under Section 409, Indian Penal Code, and was sentenced under that section to six years rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of RS. 200 and in default of payment to a further period of one year's rigorous imprisonment. The appellants Sudhir and Brojendra were charged under Section 409/120B, Indian Penal Code, or alternatively under Section 52/70, Post Office Act, and also under Section 411, Indian Penal Code. The jury brought in an unanimous verdict of guilty against both of them under Section 409/120B and also under Section 411. The appellant Sudhir was sentenced under Section 409/120B to five years rigorous imprisonment and to a fine of Rs. 200 and in default of payment to a further period of one year's rigorous imprisonment. The appellant Brojendra was sentenced under Section 409/120B to rigorous imprisonment for five years. No separate sentence was passed on either of them under Section 411, Indian Penal Code. The appellant Charubala was charged under Section 411 or alternatively under Section 414, Indian Penal Code. She was unanimously found guilty by the jury under Section 414 and was sentenced to six months rigorous imprisonment. The other two persons Surendra and Beni Madhab were charged under Section 409/120B, Indian Penal Code, or alternatively under Section 52/70, Post Office Act. They were unanimously found not guilty of either of the charges and were acquitted. Against their respective convictions and the sentences passed on them by the Additional Sessions Judge of Khulna on 20 January 1943, Satish, Sudhir and Brojendra have preferred Appeal No. 109 of 1943 and Charubala has preferred a separate appeal, being Appeal No. 130 of 1943. The two appeals came up before us together. The case which was set up by the prosecution at the trial before the Additional Sessions Judge may be briefly summarised as follows:

(2.) In April 1942 there were attached to the Khulna Bazar Post Office, which was a sub-post office, three employees namely the Sub-Post Master, Panchanan Biswas (P. W. 1) the clerk, Shaik Abdul Gani (P. W. 2) and the mail peon, Satis Chandra Seal appellant 1 in Appeal No. 109 of 1943. On 27 April 1942, four insured parcels of the total value of Rs. 9300 and two V. P. parcels and one ordinary registered parcel and certain ordinary parcels were delivered at the Khulna Bazar Post Office for transmission to the respective addressees. At about 5 P.M. on that date the four insured parcels were put into a small yellow bag by the Sub-Post Master in the presence of the clerk and Satis. Satis tied up the bag after pasting a label and sealed it with the insured seal. The registered parcels were similarly put in another small bag and sealed. Then these two small bags and the ordinary parcels and some letters in a bundle and a parcel list made out by the clerk and signed by the Sub-Post Master were put in a bigger bag called the mail bag which was tied up and sealed by Satis with the mail seal. All this operation took place in the presence of all the three employees of the Khulna Bazar Post Office. After this the clerk Shaik Abdul Gani left the post office. Shortly thereafter the Sub-Post Master Panchanan Biswas also left the post office, having been called away by the appellant Sudhir, a clerk of the Postal Superintendent's office, by means of a slip and the appellant Satis waited at the Khulna Bazar Post Office with the Mail bag for the arrival of the hand cart from the main post office with the mail bags from there. Before his departure the Sub-Post Master left with the appellant Satis the mail seal to enable the latter to seal the second mail bag containing ordinary letters to be despatched from the Khulna Bazar Post Office at 5-45 P.M. The hand cart from the main Post Office came late that day. During this interval the appellant Satis opened the first mail bag, took out the small insured parcel bag and the parcel list from the mail bag and then re-tied and re-sealed the first mail bag with the mail seal that had been left with him for sealing the second mail bag. This insured parcel bag was made over by the appellant Satis to the appellant Brojendra who was waiting outside the Khulna Bazar Post Office. The appellant Brojendra took away the insured parcel bag to his house and subsequently the money was divided amongst the appellants Satis, Sudhir and Brojendra. Surendra and Beni Madhab did not get any share of the money but they helped Satis, Sudhir and Brojendra in committing the crime.

(3.) Meanwhile the hand cart carrying the mail bags from the main Post Office arrived at the Khulna Bazar Post Office and the appellant Satis put the first mail bag of the Khulna Bazar Post Office in the hand cart and accompanied the two peons of the main Post Office with the hand cart to the R.M.S. Office. There all the mail bags including the first mail bag of the Khulna Bazar Post Office were made over to the head sorter of the R.M.S. named Nagendra Nath <JGN>Das</JGN> (P.W.4). The head sorter opened the first mail bag of the Khulna Bazar Post Office but did not find in it either the parcel list or the insured parcel bag. Nagendra wrote a letter to the Sub-Post Master of the Khulna Bazar Post Office and sent it by a peon but the latter could not find the Sub-Post Master and came back with the letter, Nagendra then posted the letter as an express letter to the Sub-Post Master. The appellant Satis came back to the Khulna Bazar Post Office and enquired about the Sub-Post Master but the latter was not found at home. Next day, 28 April 1942, the Sub-Post Master received the express letter sent by Nagendra and the Sub-Post Master wrote to the Superintendent of Post Offices intimating about the loss. On the same day at about 2 P.M. Ashutosh Maitra (P.W. 12) the sub-record clerk of R.M.S. sent intimation of the loss in writing to the police. This was recorded as the first information report.