However, he companyvicted the appellant of the other offences and sentenced him as aforementioned.
Upon companysideration of material placed before him, the learned Special Judge charged both the accused of offences punishable under Sections 409, 467 and 468 read with Section 109 IPC and Sections 5 1 d and 5 2 of the PC Act.
Bogus names were shown.
In order to bring home the guilt of the accused, prosecution examined 14 witnesses.
The appellant was assisted by four muster clerks to keep a track of persons employed for the work of companystruction of these tanks.
Aggrieved thereby the appellant has preferred this appeal.
The investigation revealed that in all a sum of Rs.6,764.10 was misappropriated by the appellant abusing his position as supervisor.
Between 7.1.1976 and l1.3.1976, same set of 21 labourers were shown to have been engaged at one and the same time for companystruction of the irrigation tanks at Kudwa, Dhakni and Mundipar.
After the report, F.I.R. was registered and on companypletion of investigation, charge sheet was sent up and trial was held in the Court of Special Judge at Gondia.
2639 of 2006 Dr. ARIJIT PASAYAT, J. Leave granted.
Background facts in a nutshell are as follows The appellant was working as Junior Engineer and was in charge of execution of companystruction of tanks at Kudwa, Dhakni and Mundipar in Gondia Sub Division.
Accused No.2 was a labourer engaged and he was made to put his thumb marks on the muster rolls to show receipt of monies by fictitious persons, who were shown to have been engaged for the works.
Arising out of SLP Crl.
This work was to be executed under the Employment Guarantee Scheme.
Payments were shown to have been made by the appellant, but in reality numbersuch payments were made.
Challenge in this appeal is to the judgment rendered by a learned Single Judge of the Bombay High Court, Nagpur Bench.
Different custodial sentences were imposed along with fine.
Since the accused pleaded number guilty, they were put on trial.
