State of Punjab vs Amrik Singh

Hemant Gupta, J.—The present appeal is directed against the order of acquittal passed by Judicial Magistrate First Class. Mansa on 23.2.1991 in a case arising out of FIR No.54 of 8.7.1985 u/s 409 of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Bareta.

Briefly stated, the prosecution story is that the respondent accused was an employee of PUNSUP, who was entrusted 240 bags of wheat and 35 empty bags and has misappropriated the same on 11.6.1985. On the basis of said allegations, the above said FIR was lodged on the basis of which Amrik Singh respondent was put on trial.

The trial Magistrate after considering evidence on record found that godowns, where the stocks were lodged were open and without any lock. The trial Magistrate also found that the wheat was purchased earlier to 1984-85 and with the passage of time, the passability of shortages cannot be ruled out and on 11.6.1985 wheat was not weighed.

We have heard Shri S.S. Randhawa, Deputy Advocate General Punjab for the appellant State of Punjab and Shri R.L. Gupta, Advocate, learned counsel for the respondent accused and on perusal of the record we are of the opinion that no case for interference is made out in the present appeal.

The wheat was purchased prior to 1984 and thereafter there were heavy rains. The godowns were open without any lock and. therefore, it cannot be said that the respondent had exclusive custody over the stocks. It is admitted by the Investigating Officer that no bags were weighed and all the bags were not counted. Without physical verification of the entire godown shortages cannot be presumed. In any case, it does not show that there is any misappropriation of wheat by the respondent. We do not find any reason to reverse the finding recorded by the trial Magistrate. The findings recorded by/ the trial Magistrate are neither perverse nor absurd. The trial Magistrate has returned the finding on appreciation of evidence.

In view of above said facts and circumstances, we do not consider it appropriate to interfere in the present appeal and dismiss the same.