LAWS(KAR)-1972-10-9

H A BOREGOUDA Vs. STATE OF MYSORE

Decided On October 30, 1972
H.A.BOREGOUDA Appellant
V/S
STATE OF MYSORE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has been convicted of an offence under S.408, IPC and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for a period of 2 years and to pay a fine of Rs.200 in default to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of 2 months by the learned First Class Magistrate at Hassan in CC. No.708/ 1969. The appeal filed by him has been dismissed by the learned Sessions Judge of Hasan and the conviction and sentence passed on him has been confirmed. In this revision, the petitioner challenges the legality and correctness of the said order of conviction and sentence passed on him.

(2.) The Sub Inspector of Police, Dudda filed a charge-sheet against the accused alleging that the accused who was the Honorary Secretary of the Service Co-operative Society of Halekoppal and who was incharge of cash transaction of the said society was entrusted with money transaction. The accused had misappropriated the cash balance of Rs.10,500-76 belonging to the said Society received from the members towards the short-term loans and fine amounts of the Society and failed to produce the cash balance when demanded and thus committed an offence under Section 409, Indian Penal Code.

(3.) Sri S.V.Shama Rao, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner has contended that the consolidated charge-sheet for the period 1961 to 1965 filed against the accused is illegal. It is argued that this was not a case of running account and at the most the Court was entitled to try in one trial 3 offences of the kind mentioned in the charge-sheet. It is contended that clubbing of a number of offences is illegal and opposed to the provisions of S.234(1) of the CrPC. It is also argued that the proceedings taken up against the accused violated the proviso 2 of Sec.222 of the CrPC. Hence it is argued that the whole trial against the accused is vitiated and the conviction and sentence passed on him should be set aside. The learned Counsel has relied on a decision of this Court in Krishna Murthy v. State of Mysore, 1964 1 Mys.L.J. 440. in support of the said contentions.