Hari Ram vs The State of Rajasthan

Deo Narayan Thanvi, J.—These are three revision petitions field against the judgment of the learned Additional District & Sessions judge, No. 2, Jodhpur dated 12.08.1991 whereby while dismissing the appeals of the petitioners, he confirmed the judgment of the trial court, i.e. Judicial Magistrate, pipar city in which all the petitioners were convicted u/s 408 IPC with three years rigorous imprisonment and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/- eich, in default to undergo three months simple imprisonment.

The charge against the accused Petitioners was that they committed criminal breach of trust of the Cooperative Bank amount Being employee of Birani Gram Seva Sahakari Samiti. Petitioner Jai Kishan was the Cashier and he did not make entry in the cash-book of the amount of Rs. 15,000/- on 20.06.1978 and also Rs. 16,000/- were withdrawn for his own use on 12.07.1978. Petitioner Bhanwar Lal was Secretary and he compelled petitioner Jai Kishan to withdraw Rs. 15,000/-. Petitioner Baldev was Manager of the cooperative Bank and helped Jai Kishan to withdraw Rs. 16,000/- for purchase manure and made less entry of Rs. 7.50p in distribution of sugar on 12.07.1978.

All the petitioners were charged u/s 408 IPC to which they pleaded not guilty. Prosecution examined 28 witnesses. Statements of the accused - Petitioners were recorded u/s 313 Cr.P.C. They led to no defence. After hearing the arguments, the learned Magistrate convicted the accused - Petitioners as above and their appeals were also dismissed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, No. 2, Jodhpur against which these revision petitions have been filed.

Heard arguments of the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned public prosecutor and perused the record of the case.

Learned Public Prosecutor supported the judgment of the trial court as well as the appellate court but the learned Counsel for the petitioners submits that incident is 37 years old and the embezzled amount is not much more. That apart, accused - Petitioners are now of very old age. According to him, petitioner Jai Kishan is about 80 years of age, petitioner Hari Ram is about 55 years of age and petitioner Bhanwar Lal is more than 80 years of age, therefore, they should be granted benefits under the provisions of probation of Offenders Act.

Looking to the submissions made by the learned Counsel for the petitioners, the prayer for probation appears to be just and reasonable.

Consequently, these revision petitions are party allowed. While maintaining the conviction of the accused - Petitioners u/s 408 IPC, they are released under the probation of offenders Act provided each of them furnishes a personal bond of Rs, 10,000/- and surety of like amount to the satisfaction of the learned trial court within a period of 30 days from today for keeping peace and be of a good behavior for a period of one year, else they will serve out the sentence as awarded by the learned trial court and confirmed by the appellate court.