50,000/ from the Society out of which he had paid up Rs.
50,000/ .
He also made numbercomplaint whatsoever against the present appellant.
I do number know whether the price was fixed at Rs.
He had entrusted Balwant Singh Uttam Singh, the brother of the appellant, with the truck.
Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated the 15 2 1971 of the Borrrbay High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
This is all the evidence against the appellant.
I do number know whether M Lorry No.
It is said that Balwant Singh Uttarnsingh had met S. D. Sutar again on 12 3 1968 and told him that he would turn up again.
I do number know where is my brother at present.
As Shankar Dhondiba Sutar had number paid up the whole amount due for the truck which he had borrowed from the Society, the owner of the truck, as entered in the Insurance papers, was the Society itself.
It is true that Vazir Singh and one P.C. had told me to take the lorry at the Pydhonie Police Stn.
This amount was paid regularly upto December, 1967.
He had a companytract with Balwant Singh Uttam Singh under which he used to get a net income of Rs.
And, when the owner asked him to take him to the truck, it is alleged that he did number companyply with this request.
The prosecution evidence in the case was one Shankar Dhondiba Sutar a member of the Ex Servicemen Transport Cooperative Society Ltd., Bombay, had purchased the Truck No.
And I hereby direct that you be tried by me on the said charge.
Thereafter, Balwantsingh Uttamsingh, the driver, avoided meeting the purchaser of the truck and was said to be absconding.
Vazir Singh Gaya Singh, PW 2, the Secretary of the Bombay Ex Servicemen Transport Co. deposed that S. D. Sutar was a shareholder in the Company and proved the terms of his companytract with Balwantsingh.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal N4.
It has been translated as follows Ext.1 Dated 12 3 1968.
Mangal Singh told me that this lorry had met with an accident and that I should invest the amount over repair, and after the amount is recovered from the plying of the lorry, the lorry would be returned to him.
The only question that the appellant was asked by the learned Magistrate under Section 342 Criminal Procedure Code and the appellants reply are What do you wish to say with reference to the evidence given and recorded against you?
On 4 3 1968, the truck met with an accident and Balwantsingh Uttamsingh is said to have sent information of it to S. D. Sutar.
2000/ to Rs.
1354 lf 1 969.
43,000/ .
M. Sikka for the appellant.
7372 valued at Rs.
52,000/ belonging to the companyplainant Shankar Dhondiba Sutar as driver companymitted criminal breach of trust in respect of the said property and aided and abetted to the absconding accused in companymission of the said offence and thereby companymitted an offence punishable under Sec.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by BEG, J. The appellant before us by special leave was charged as follows by the Presidency Magistrate of Bombay B. P. Saptarshi, Presidency Magistrate 6th Court, Mazaagaon, Bombay, do hereby charge you Karnal Singh S o Uttam Singh as follows That you on or about the 20th day of February, 1968 at Bombay along with one Balwant Singh s o Uttam Singh who has absconded, at 171, Kazi Sayyed Street, being entrusted with certain property to wit M Lorry No.
133 of 1971.
S. D. Sutar stated that he found the truck at Thana Katha where he also found the appellant before us, Karnalsingh Uttamsingh, who had been, apparently, driving the truck.
It is against Balwantsingh Uttamsingh and makes numberallegations against the present appellant.
C. Bhandare and M. N. Shroff for Respondent.
2200/ p.m. from Balwantsingh Uttamsingh who was running the truck and seemed to be incurring all necessary expenses of it.
The First Information Report was lodged on 20 4 1968 at 12.30 p.m. by S. D. Sutar.
K. Gambhir and 5.
114 of the Indian Penal Code and within my companynizance.
On 9 3 1968, according to Sutar, Balwantsingh him self went to Sutar.
408 r.w.
Sub Inspector Ramesh Damodar, PW 3, stated that, on 13 5 1968, Vazir Singh, PW 2, and a police companystable brought the truck to Pydhonie Police Station and that it was being driven by the present appellant at that time.
All that he said was that the truck was seen near Kashali Bridge and the present accused was its driver.
I do number know whether Balwant Singh left with M Lorry in Dec. 1967.
I do number know anything about Balwant Singh number meeting the companyplainant thereafter.
MRS 7372 was handed over to the companyplainant on sale purchase agreement and that the companyplainant had paid Rs.
43,000/ towards the instalment.
I was the driver on the said vehicle at that time.
MRS 7372 after taking a loan of Rs.
Balwant Singh is my brother but I do number know if the companyplainant had given lorry in his possession in his capacity as a driver.
