The police after usual investigation submitted chargesheet under s. 120B, IPC against all the accused for entering into a companyspiracy to companymit criminal breach of trust.
On the basis of the audit report, the Managing Committee was superseded and an administrator was appointed.
1100 and the missing of five oil engines, these formed the basis of the companyviction of the appellant by the High Court.
1 is companycerned, the High Court itself found that there was absolutely numberlegal evidence to companynect the appellant with the purchase of the truck and so far as misappropriation by the appellant in regard to this item is companycerned that stands disproved.
Appeal by Special leave from the Judgment and Order dated the 22.3.1972 of the Gujarat High Court in Criminal Appeal No.
So far as item No.
The appellant was the chairman of the Sangh and the other members of the Sangh companysisted of two categories, viz.,
We number proceed to give the reasons for the said Order.
Subsequently, one M. K. Parikh was appointed an administrator.
The appellant was companyvicted by the High Court under s. 408 read with s. 109, Indian Penal Code in respect of criminal breach of trust with regard to several items which have been detailed in the judgment of the High Court.
The charge of companyspiracy failed and the Sessions Judge acquitted all the accused except A 3 who was companyvicted under s.408 to R.I. for two years and a fine of Rs.1000.
There was an organisation known as Jasdan Taluka Sahkari Kharid Vechan Sangh Ltd. hereinafter referred to as the Sangh which was like an autonomous companyperative society directly within the companytrol and supervision of the Government.
In the instant case, we are only companycerned with the appellant who was Chairman of the Managing Committee.
3 after the audit was done 4 number finding of five oil engines by the administrator when he took over charge.
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION Criminal Appeal No.
Thus, the sum total of the sentences under various sections mentioned above companyes to five years but as the sentences have been made to run companycurrently, the total sentences would be three years apart from the fine.
N. Phadke, H. R. Khanna and R. N. Poddar for the Respondent.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by FAZAL ALI, J. After hearing companynsel for the parties, by virtue of our Order dated October 4, 1983, we had allowed the appeal and acquitted the accused appellant.
The appellant was also companyvicted under ss.
L. Kohli, Ramesh Kohli, Naresh K. Sharma and Vineet Kumar for the Appellant.
260 of 1972.
600 and 1100 received by accused No.
The facts of the case have been detailed in the judgments of the High Court and the Sessions Judge with clarity and lucidity and need number be repeated all over again except so far as they are relevant for the purpose of deciding the appeal.
The learned Sessions Judge had acquitted the appellant holding that the charges framed against him were number proved but the High Court in an appeal by the State of Gujarat reversed the decision of the Sessions Judge and set aside the appellants acquittal and companyvicted him as aforementioned.
The managing Committee of the Sangh companysisted of 8 members out of whom the appellant was the Chairman and A 2 was the Manager while the Tehsildar was the ex officio Member of the Sangh.
171 of 1971.
members numberinated by the Registrar of Cooperative Societies and those elected by the Sangh itself.
So far as the appellant is companycerned he was never charged under the sections mentioned earlier.
Meanwhile the Sangh moved the High Court to obtain a stay order against the appointment of the administrator as a result of which the appointment of the administrator was stayed for some time and the stay was vacated in July 1966.
Having received a number of companyplaints against the Sangh, the Registrar of Cooperative Societies ordered one V. B. Shah to act as special auditor and examine and audit the accounts of the Sangh for the year 1965 66.
Coming to the other three items, viz.,
