The appellant was working as a Tahsildar at Bharni from 18th June.
A receipt said to have been given to him by Wedhonkar was produced by the appellant.
824.20 ps.
If the Cash Books were number maintained every day, it was the duty of the Tahsildar to see that they were maintained properly.
1195/ from the auction purchaser.
The case of the prosecution was that between 2nd February 1968 and 1st March 1968 he received a total sum of Rs.
The amounts companyered by the receipts were never credited in the Treasury at Chikhalda.
That was the subject matter of the first case.
As Tahsildar the appellant was Incharge of receipt of amounts due to the Government by way of revenue, fines etc.
1967 to 24th June 1968.
The receipts were prepared by Pande and companyntersigned by the appellant.
This amount was also number credited to the Government in the Treasury.
The Trial Court, the appellate companyrt and the Court of Revision have companycurrently found the appellant guilty of charges under Section 409 Indian Penal Code in two separate cases.
The defence of the appellant was number that the amounts were number received but that the amounts had been handed over on 25th March 1968 to Wadhonkar for the purpose of being remitted into the treasury.
In the second case the allegation was that the appellant had auctioned certain timber and had received a sum of Rs.
Pande and Wedhonkar were working under him during that period as Reader and Clerk respectively.
from sixteen persons towards land revenue and issued receipts to them.
Chinnappa Reddy, J. These criminal appeals may be disposed of by a single judgment.
