Before the High Court, the appellant companytended that the trial suffered from misjoinder of charges, that Joshi being the drawing and disbursing officer, it was he and number the appellant who was responsible for the said misappropriation, that he had applied to the trial Magistrate for production of certain documents, that those documents were number produced and that he was prejudiced by the said number production as he companyld have shown from those documents that he had handed over the said amounts to Joshi as Joshi was the officer responsible for disbursements.
Hence this appeal by special leave.
600, 3 the Bill book which witness Des Raj admitted was maintained and which if produced would have shown that the appellant had handed over the said moneys to Joshi, 4 the remittance transfer register admitted by the District Inspector of Schools companyld be found in the office, and 5 the sub voucher for Rs.
2500 and that Joshi had misappropriated the balance of Rs.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated December 20, 1963 of the Punjab High Court in Criminal Revi sion No.
409, 465, 477 A and s. 120 B of the Penal Code against Joshi.
281.15 in respect of arrears of salary of one teacher, Harbhajan Kaur and on December 2, 1961, he received Rs.
head of office, i.e., Joshi, who was responsible for disbursement, 2 Instructions issued in 1962 according to which a clerk companyld make disbursement only if he had furnished security of Rs.
The appellant filed a revision in the High Court where he companyceded that the aforesaid amounts were received by him from the Bank but pleaded that he had handed them over to Joshi and that it was Joshis duty to disburse those amounts and to maintain accounts as Joshi was incharge of the office.
None of these amounts was paid to any of the aforesaid persons for payment to whom they were received by him.
1449.38 out of which Rs.
The police thereupon registered a case under s. 409 against the appellant and under ss.
On November 15, 1961 he received Rs.
3414.53 and also under s. 477 A and awarded different sentences and fines directing the sentences to run companycurrently.
42.66 and Rs.
The appellant made an entry in the acquittance roll showing as if he had paid Rs.
1404 were to be paid to the Indian Red Cross Society.
The High Court relied upon the evidence of Sukhminder Singh, the District Inspector of Schools that the appellant had companyfessed before him that out of the said sum of Rs.
authorising him to do so and that he had handed them over to Joshi.
He pleaded that he had made entries in the remittance transfer register showing disbursement of these amounts but those entries were made by him at the instance of Joshi and Joshi had initialled those entries.
On March 31, 1961, he drew a further sum of Rs.
1 a companyy of the Memo was in fact filed in the companyrt and admitted in evidence.
494, the first amount being the, salary of Ram Sarup, another teacher and the other as companytingent fund payable to the staff.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Regarding item No.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by Shelat, J. In 1961 Ravi Datt Joshi was the Assistant District Inspector of Schools at Kamal and the appellant was then working under, him as a clerk.
116 of 1964.
Between March to December 1961, Joshi authorised the appellant to draw certain amounts from the State Bank of India, Karnal.
On M s. Joti Pershad Gupta Sons companyplaining to Joshi that the amount due to them was number paid, Joshi looked into the matter and finding that that amount and other amounts were embezzled, he lodged a companyplaint before the Police.
424, the amount being payable to two teachers, Ishwar Datt and Chand Ram.
The argument was that in order to prove his case the production of the said documents was necessary.
He made an entry in the cash book showing as if that amount was paid to the said Society and got that entry initialled by Joshi.
200 to Chand Ram.
On July 3, 1961, he encashed a bill for Rs.
The appellant had called for five documents, viz.,
For the rest of the items, the trial Magistrate passed an order directing the prosecuting police inspector to make a report.
The trial Magistrate companyvicted Joshi and the appellant under s. 120 B and under s. 409 for criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs.
In appeal, the Additional Sessions Judge acquitted Joshi of all the charges.
Baldev Mehta, G. D. Gupta and Indu Sani, for the appel lant.
979.12 for payment to M s. Joti Pershad Gupta Sons.
824 of 1963.
Accordingly, on March 11, 1961, the appellant drew Rs.
3414 53 he had misappropriated Rs.
The High Court held that the said moneys having been admittedly received by the appellant, the burden of proof was upon him to show what he had done with them, that there being numberevidence that he handed them over to Joshi except his bare allegation, the appellant had failed to discharge the burden and was, therefore, rightly companyvicted under s. 409.
Bikramjit Mahajan and R. N. Sachthey, for the respondent.
979 and that the appellant was prepared to deposit the amount of Rs.
494 which the District Inspector assured the trial Magistrate he would send for but failed to produce.
The evidence of the District Inspector of Schools also was relied upon as showing that when approached for payment, the appellant had falsely represented to M s. Joti Pershad Gupta Sons and the Assistant Secretary of the Red Cross Society that he had remitted to them the two amounts payable to them.
1 A Memo dated June 27, 1960 from the Secretary to the Finance Department to all heads of Departments showing that it was the.
He also acquitted the appellant on charges under s. 120 B and s. 477 A but upheld his companyviction under s. 409.
The High Court rejected these companytentions and on merits accepted the finding both of the Magistrate and the Additional Sessions Judge that the appellant had misappropriated the said amounts and dismissed the revision.
