9911796707
TMI Blog1979 (1) TMI 250X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ach count and in default one month's rigorous imprisonment under each head. All the sentences were directed to run concurrently. 2. It seems to us that this is rather an unfortunate case where a school teacher has been made the victim of unfortunate circumstances of which an undue advantage has been taken by colleagues and others who were by no means friendly to him and who got an opportunity to bolster up a case against the appellant. 3. The appellant was a Principal of a Higher Secondary School, Kakarhati and joined his assignment on 21st November, 1963 He had preceded two other persons who were the Principals of the same school. The main charge against him was that on 6-3-1964 he had drawn a sum of Rs. 993.30 on the contingent bill ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... who has actually drawn the amount on the orders of the appellant and who was later on dismissed from service by the appellant for some irregularities. The central evidence against the appellant consists of Ex P-12 which is a sort of a confession made by the appellant to P W. 10, Shri B. D Naik, Assistant Divisional Superintendent Education on 1-9-1964. P. W. 10 further look the abundant caution of taking a written statement signed by him from the appellant on the same date which is Ex. D-7 in the case. In this statement the appellant seems to have admitted to have falsely drawn Rs. 500/- towards the salary of Pancham Chowkidar and subsequently is said to have redeposited this amount in the treasury. The High Court and the Special Judge have ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hich was rightly negatived by the High Court, because the issues in the two cases were different though the evidence was more or less similar. Mr.Sanghi, counsel for the appellant fairly conceded that he was not in a position to press the plea of issue estoppel as regards Ex. P-12. It is not disputed that this was a confession made by the appellant to Mr. Naik who was his Superior Officer and was, therefore, a person in authority. Both the trial court and the High Court have accepted this position. 9. Secondly, the appellant in his statement under Section 342 Cr.PC. while answering the question put to him regarding this document stated as follows:- It is false that I wrote Exhibit P-12 of my own accord. The truth is that is when Shri B D ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the appellant had definitely pleaded that the statement was not his voluntary statement but was taken by PW 10 under duress. Such a statement was, therefore, clearly in admissible under Section 24 of the Evidence Act But that apart, even if the statement is admissible having regard to the circumstances mentioned above, its probative value is precious little. Thus, the documents Ex. P-12 and D7 have to be excluded from consideration for the reasons given above. 11. Another circumstance which throws serious doubt on the prosecution case is that the entire proceedings appear to have been started on the basis of a complaint filed by the clerk P W. 8 Yagya Narain. Yagya Narain was a person who had actually drawn the money from the Treasury ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hal, the gardener and Rambai. undoubtedly worked in the school and yet their names also are not found in the attendance register but the amount withdrawn by the appellant in respect of the expenses incurred for them has not been doubted. In these circumstances, therefore, the mere absence of any mention of the name of Pancham Chowkidar in the attendance register would not conclusively prove that he was not an employee of the school. 13. Another important circumstance which appears to have been over looked by the Courts below is that the prosecution itself relies on Ex. P. 26 which is a receipt alleged to have been given by Pancham and P. W. 9 Pancham has admitted his signature on this receipt. It was however alleged by the prosecution that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y reliance on the general statement of some witnesses who deposed that they did not find Pancham working in the school. 14. P W. 6 Puranal who was a teacher of the school has no doubt said that no person of the name of Dhimar was working in those days. Moreover, he further admits that in Ex. P-4 which is the attendance register, the attendance of only those persons is entered who remain present in the school during working time. Obviously , Pancham was working as chowkidar daring nighttime and, therefore, his name may not have been mentioned in the attendance register. 15. Lastly, P.W. 4 Puranal used to work during day time in the school and he does not say that he ever visited the school during night. In these circumstances, as Pancham&# ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
