Baldev Raj vs State of Haryana

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.

This revision petition filed against the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra in Criminal Appeal No. 134 of 1983, dated January 22, 1987.

The petitioner was prosecuted for the offences under Sections 120B and 409 of the Indian Penal Code. The case of the prosecution is that the petitioner and another, were working as Conductors in Haryana Roadways, Chandigarh and that petitioner No. 1 was posted as reliever at Sub Depot Kaithal of Haryana Roadways while his coaccused was also posted as Conductor there. The resident Sr. Auditor on 5.9.1973 found that certain tickets were missing and according to the case of the prosecution, petitioner admitted that he sold the tickets in the month of April, 1973 to August, 1973 While he was working as conductor at JindKaithal but he wrongly showed that the said tickets were issued to Karan Singh, conductor of Jind on 16.7.1973 whose bag contained tickets was reported to have been lost and the entry with regard to the aforesaid tickets had been made by Balbir Kumar, coaccused. Thus, according to the case of the prosecution, both the accused cheated the Haryana Roadways and also misappropriated the amount by selling the said tickets. A chargesheet was filed against the accused Baldev Raj and Balbir Kumar in the court of the Sub Division Judicial Magistrate, Kaithal. The learned Magistrate framed the charges against the accused under sections120B and 409 IPC to which the accused pleaded not guilty. In order to prove the guilt of the accused, the prosecution examined 15 witnesses and marked documents. After closure of the prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. The accused did not produce any evidence in defence. On a consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Magistrate convicted the accused for the offences under Sections 120B and 409 IPC and sentenced the petitioners to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of Rs. 500/ under section 409 IPC and to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of one year under Section 120B IPC Aggrieved by the said conviction imposed on the accused Baldev Raj preferred Criminal Appeal No. 134 of 1983 on the file of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge confirmed the conviction of the accused recorded by the Sub Divisional Judicial Magistrate in regard to the offence under Section 409 IPC but conviction under Section 120B IPC was set aside. The appeal filed by the coaccused Balbir Kumar was allowed and his conviction and sentence has been set aside. The learned Additional Sessions Judge reduced the period of sentence of petitioner Baldev Raj to the one till the rising of the Court and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/. Aggrieved by the same, accused Baldev Raj preferred the above revision.

The case of the prosecution is that some tickets of the denomination of Rs. 3/ and 4.40 paise the value of which comes to Rs. 2940/ had been found missing during checking which took place on 5.9.1973 and that Baldev Raj was incharge of the tickets and he wrongly showed that these tickets had been issued to one Karam Singh whose bag was reported to have been lost. The petitioner admitted his guilt in his statement Ext. PW 15/B. There is material to show that the statement Ext. PW 15/B was as result of inducement. The said statement was recorded by the petitioner himself in the presence of the Senior Auditor Mr. W.R. Dua and Ved Parkash Sood Incharge. The evidence of P.Ws. 7, 10, 11 and 15 clearly shows that there was entrustment of the tickets to the accused and the same is proved, it is for the accused to prove that he has not misappropriated the amount gathered of these tickets. Further, Ext. PW. 15/B clearly proves the guilt of the accused. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge rightly placed reliance on the evidence of PW. 15, the Accounts Officer. His statement was also proved by the evidence of P.W.s. 7, 10, 11 and 15. The accused has also deposited the amount of these tickets. Therefore, I do not find any illegality or irregularity in the conviction recorded by the Addl. Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra for the offence under section 409 IPC against the accused. Taking into account the lapse of time and that the accused has deposited the amount, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge reduced the period of sentence to the one till rising of the Court and to pay fine of Rs. 1000/. On consideration of the material on record, I do not find any grounds warranting interference with the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra.

The revision petition, therefore, fails and is hereby dismissed.