CHITRAMAN CHETTRI Vs. STATE OF SIKKIM

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The Revisionist was employed as a Senior Product Executive of Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited on 2007-2015 and entrusted with the responsibility of collecting Equated Monthly Installment (EMI) from customers who had availed of loan from the said company. On 4/9/2017, one Purna Bahadur Mukhia, Branch Manager, Shriram Transport Finance Company Limited, Jorethang Branch, filed a Complaint, Exhibit - 1, on behalf of the said Company, stating that the Revisionist, a permanent resident of Timburbong, Soreng, an employee of the company had collected EMIs from borrowers, amounting to a sum of Rs.5,76,780.00(Rupees five lakhs, seventy six thousand, seven hundred and eighty) only, but had not deposited the collected amounts at the branch office. The Revisionist had misappropriated the said amount which had been deposited with him by fourteen customers. Investigation was taken up after registration of the case and on completion of investigation, Charge-Sheet was submitted against the Revisionist under Sec. 408 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter, the "IPC").

(2.) Learned Counsel for the Revisionist submits that the only point that he seeks to press in Revision before this Court is that the Revisionist be extended the benefit of Sec. 4 of the Probation of Offenders Act, 1958. That, he has no criminal antecedents and his aged parents who live in a remote part of Soreng District, Sikkim, are dependent on him for their livelihood which he is presently eking out by selling vegetables. That, he has a wife, who is unemployed and a daughter aged about six years, who are also completely dependent on him. That, incarcerating him would in fact be extending the penalty to the family members as in his absence they would be deprived of their day to day requirements and means of livelihood. That, till date he has returned a sum of Rs.2,50,000.00(Rupees two lakhs and fifty thousand) only, to the persons from whom he had collected the EMIs. That, should this Court be inclined to consider his prayer for probation, he undertakes to repay the remaining amount within a period of twelve months to the persons from whom he had collected the EMIs.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the State-Respondent submits that he has no objection to the prayers put forth, subject to the condition that, the repayment shall be made by the Revisionist within twelve months of this Judgment. Should he default, then he may be ordered to complete his sentence as pronounced by the Learned Trial Court.