ABRAR AHMAD Vs. INAYAT HUSAIN, S/O LATE VILAYAT HUSAIN AND ORS
LAWS(UTN)-2012-12-141
HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND
Decided on December 14,2012

ABRAR AHMAD Appellant
VERSUS
Inayat Husain, S/O Late Vilayat Husain And Ors Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) This appeal, preferred under section 378 (4) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short Cr.P.C.), is directed against the judgment and order dated 03.04.1999, passed by Civil Judge (Jr.Div.)/ Judicial Magistrate, Almora, in Criminal Complaint Case No. 182 of 1998, whereby said court has acquitted accused/ respondents Inayat Husain, Shafkat Husain, Mohd. Jamal and Shanshah from the charge of offences punishable under section 406 and 506(2) IPC.
(2.) Heard learned counsel for the parties, and perused the lower court record.
(3.) Prosecution story, in brief, is that appellant Abrar Ahmad filed criminal complaint before the trial court against accused/respondents Inayat Husain, Shafkat Husain, Mohd. Jamal and Shanshah with the allegation that in the month of September, 1992, a committee was constituted of twenty one members. They included Parvez Ahmad, Himgiri, Prakash Singh Bisht, Naveen Chandra Tiwari, Mohd. Hasan, Inayat Husain, Raseed Husain, Shehgal Abdul Jabbar, Niranjan Kumar, Shakeel Ahmad, Parvez Ahmad, Inayat Husain, Abrar Ahmad, Zayed Husain, Shahanshah Ahmad and Abdul Ahmad. It was decided amongst twenty one members that each one of them shall deposit Rs. 3,000/- per month (in all Rs. 63,000/- per month), and whosoever out of twenty one, bids highest will take the amount of that month, and profits earned were to be distributed amongst the members. It is alleged by the complainant that accounts of the committee used to be maintained by the accused Inayat Husain. It is further alleged that accused persons cleverly kept on making highest bids to usurp the amount. By December, 1993 complainant had deposited Rs. 45,000/- with the committee. He had to arrange marriage of his daughter for which he wanted to make highest bid but he was told by the accused that committee has been closed. On this appellant/complainant demanded back Rs. 45,000/- deposited by him but he was paid only Rs. 5,800/- as such the rest of the amount deposited by the appellant according to him was criminally misappropriated by the accused persons as there was criminal breach of trust on their part. After recording statement of the complainant, and that of witnesses under section 200 and 202 Cr.P.C., the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Almora, summoned the accused persons under section 406 and 506(2)IPC. The evidence was recorded under section 244 Cr.P.C. and charge was framed against the four accused/respondents named above whereafter further evidence and cross-examination was recorded under section 246 Cr.P.C., meanwhile, the case appears to have been transferred to the court of Civil Judge(Jr. Div.)/ Judicial Magistrate, Almora.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.