Ram Singh vs State of Punjab

M.L. Singhal, J.

The prosecution case in brief is that Ram Singh, accused, was SecretarycumCashier of Halimwala Cooperative Agricultural Service Society. It was his duty to withdraw the amount from the bank on behalf of the Society. It was also his duty to deposit the amount in the account of the Society in the Bank. Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Fazilka imputed criminal breach of trust to the accused in respect of an amount of Rs. 9,660/ being Secretary of the Society. He got F.I.R. No. 23 registered against him at P.S. Sadar, Fazilka, on 12.1.1992. According to the prosecution, one Inder Singh S/o Fateh Singh had taken loan of Rs. 9,048/ from the society being its member. He had handed over Rs. 9,000/, another amount of Rs. 48/ and interest of Rs. 612/ to the accused on 1051988 and 661988 respectively. Accused entered the factum of these deposits in the pass book exhibit P1 of said Inder Singh and gave him Clearance Certificate also. Instead of depositing the said amount in the account of the Society in the Bank, he brought the amount to his own use and thus misappropriated it. The accused was confronted by the Society. He gave in writing to the Society admitting that he had misappropriated that amount and spent it on his own use and that he would deposit the amount within a period of one month. He failed to deposit the amount.

After investigation, the accused was challaned.

The accused was charged under Section 408 IPC. He pleaded not guilty to the charge and claimed trial.

On the conclusion of the trial, learned Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fazilka, vide order dated 29.11.1997, found the charge proved against him. He, accordingly, convicted him and sentenced him to undergo R.I. for two years and to pay fine of Rs. 1,000/. In default of payment of fine, to undergo further R.I. for three months.

Aggrieved from conviction and sentence passed upon him by the learned Magistrate, accused went in appeal to the Court of Sessions.

Learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur, dismissed the appeal, so far as conviction is concerned, she however reduced his sentence to 11/2 years period. Sentence of fine was, however, maintained.

Accused has knocked the door of this Court through this revision and has prayed for acquittal.

It was submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that there is no proof that the amount was entrusted to him and if there was no entrustment, there could be no criminal misappropriation. Suffice it to say, Inder Singh was a member of the Cooperative Society. He has stated that as a member, he took loan from the Society. He refunded a sum of Rs. 9,660/ to the Society. Accused also certified that Inder Singh had deposited the entire amount with him and nothing was due from him. Subash Chander Kataria, Branch Manager, proved the account statement of PW Inder Singh which is Exhibit PW8/A which shows that a sum of Rs. 9,048/ was still to be paid by Inder Singh in respect of the loan obtained by him. It was for the accused to explain why the amount was still outstanding against Inder Singh when he had given him the Clearance Certificate.

I have gone through the judgment passed by the learned Magistrate. I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the appraisal of evidence made by the learned Magistrate. Similarly, I do not find any infirmity or illegality in the reappraisal of the evidence made by the learned Sessions Judge, Ferozepur. In my opinion, the learned Courts below justifiably found the charge proved against the accused and convicted him.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the accused should be released on probation of good conduct.

Accused is unable to compensate the Society to the tune of an amount of Rs. 30/35,000/. Keeping, however, in view that the accused has been facing mental pain and agony of this trial for the last about six years, I feel that the sentence should be slashed. So, sentence is slashed and is brought down to R.I. for six months period. Sentence of find imposed upon the petitioner shall remain intact. He will undergo further R.I. for one month in case he fails to pay the amount of fine. Subject to this reduction on sentence, this revision fails and is dismissed.

Revision dismissed.