M.M.Gupta - (1.) THESE appeals have been preferred by the State against the acquittal of respondent Hazari Lal Gupta for offences under section 409 IPC. Since the evidence was recorded in respect of the trials in the same trial and they have been disposed of by the consent of the parties by the same judgment the appeals have been heard together.
(2.) BHADOHI town in Varanasii district manufactures woollen carpets and these carpets are also exported to foreign countries. Firm Messrs Narottam Das and Sons whose proprietor is Bechu Lal, Firm Babu Nandan Rameshwar Prasad of which the proprietor is Rameshwar Prasad, Firm Mehi Lal and Co. of which the proprietor is Triloki Nath and Firm Domestic Carpet Co. of which Raghunath Prasad is the partner and Firm B. S. Carpet Co. of which he is the Manager, deal in woollen carpets at BHADOHI. Respondent Hazari Lai Gupta is the wife brother of Mohan Lai Gupta, brother of Bechu Lal proprietor Firm Narottam Das and Sons. In 1952 respondent came to Bhadohi ami represented to these firms that he had a long experience of business in foreign countries and if aforementioned firms were willing to export their woollen carpets to him he would sell them in London on commission basis. On the sales of the carpets he would receive 5 percent commission and send back the sale proceeds to them. He was, therefore, to work as the agent of these firms. After these agreements were entered into the respondent started business under the Firm styled as H. Gupta (London) Ltd. and under the style "Oriental Wool Carpet Ltd." in London. In pursuance of these agreements the aforementioned dealers exported woollen carpets to the respondent. The invoices and Bills of Landing were sent through the Banks. The respondent received the woollen carpets and some times also made part payments but substantial amounts were not sent by him. In 1965 the respondent came to India. The proprietors of the aforementioned Firms pressed on him to clear the accounts by making payments or to send back the goods to them. The respondent, however, evaded any direct reply. Bechu Lal himself went to London in 1969. He came to know that the entire carpets were sold but the respondent was evading making; payments to the aforementioned firms. In 1970 the respondent again came to India to visit his sister in Bhadohi when the proprietors of the aforementioned firms pressed on him to clear the accounts. It appeared to them that the respondent had committed criminal breach of trust in respect of the amount that were due to them. They, therefore, lodged reports mentioning the facts at Police Station Bhadohi on 30-6-1970 and 4-7-1970. It was also mentioned in these reports that the respondent was in India and he had already obtained passport leaving for England and unless he was put under arrest he may be beyond the reach of law in India. It was claimed that the respondent! had committed criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 504 and (six) Domestic: Carpet Co. and Rs. 850, due to B. S. Carpet Co.; Rs. 10490 due to firm Mihi Lal and Sons ; a sum of Rs. 2,07,000.00 due to firm Narottam Das and sons and Rs. 1,496 due to firm Babu Nandan Rameshwar Prasad.
(3.) INVESTIGATION of the case was entrusted to Sri P. P. Misra, Inspector, CID, U. P. under the orders of the S. P., E. CO. I. (CID) after it was investigated in the initial stage by the local Police. The respondent was arrested. In the course of the investigation he recorded statements of Raghunath Prasad, Rameshwar Prasad, Bechu Lal and Triloki Nath and other witnesses. He also sent papers for the sanction of the prosecution of the respondent by the High Commissioner/Political Agent. He had ultimately obtained their sanctions. The cases were instituted after the sanction of the Political Agent and High Commissioner for India was obtained. The respondent in the course of his statement under section 313 CrPC admitted the agreements by the aforementioned firms for export of woollen carpets from Bhadohi to his firms in London. He had also admitted that it was agreed that he would receive 5 percent commission on the sale. He also admitted that he had opened a firm in the style H. Gupta (London) Ltd. He had also stated that the aforementioned firms sent carpets to him but he was unable to give the exact price without seeing the exact account. He further stated that some of the goods were sold and that the sale money of the goods that were sold by him was sent by him. He admitted having sent Ex. Ka-98 aid Ka-91 and Exs. Ka-21 to Ka-29 to Messrs Narottam Das and Sons. He claimed that in respect of unsold articles he had come to India to take money from the exporters for arranging of sending goods back to India but since he was put under arrest he could not carry it out. He further denied the sale of the goods at the time of the visit of Bechu Lal to England.;