1964 (2) TMI 110 - HC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Whether the respondent used the cheque for Rs. 3423.50 nP. belonging to the M.P. Electricity Board in purchasing a motor cycle for himself.
2. If so, what offence was committed by him.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Whether the respondent used the cheque for Rs. 3423.50 nP. belonging to the M.P. Electricity Board in purchasing a motor cycle for himself:

The prosecution's case was that the respondent, an Upper Division Clerk at the M.P. Electricity Board, conspired with another clerk, Ghosh, to tamper with official documents and embezzle a cheque for Rs. 3423.50 nP. The cheque was used to purchase an auto-cycle and subsequently a motor cycle from Janta Motor Cycle Co. The respondent claimed the cheque represented a loan from the Electricity Board. The cheque was encashed by the Janta Motor Cycle Co. and used to purchase a motor cycle for the respondent. This was corroborated by the statements of Nirmal Singh Chhabra, the dealer, who confirmed that the respondent used the cheque to purchase the motor cycle. The dealer's account books supported this, and no credible evidence was presented by the defense to counter this claim.

2. If so, what offence was committed by him:

The trial Magistrate found the respondent guilty of criminal breach of trust under Section 409 of the Penal Code, but the Additional Sessions Judge acquitted him, emphasizing that "entrustment" was not proven. The High Court agreed that the prosecution failed to establish "entrustment," a necessary element for criminal breach of trust. However, the court found that the respondent committed the offence of criminal misappropriation under Section 403 of the Penal Code. The essence of this offence is that the property of another person comes into the possession of the accused in some neutral manner and is then misappropriated or converted to his own use. The respondent misappropriated the cheque, converting it to his own use by purchasing the motor cycle. The court held that even without a specific charge under Section 403, the conviction could be sustained under Sections 236, 237, and 238 of the Criminal Procedure Code, as the charge under Section 409 covered the accusation of misappropriation.

Judgment:

The High Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the Additional Sessions Judge's judgment and order of acquittal. The respondent was found guilty under Section 403 of the Penal Code and sentenced to one year's rigorous imprisonment. The motor cycle seized from the respondent was ordered to be delivered to the M.P. Electricity Board.