- (1.) HEARD Sri P.N. Tripathi, learned counsel for the revisionist, Sri Rahul Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the record of the case.
(2.) THIS criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 31.1.2005, passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge/Fast Track Court No.5, Jaunpur, by which the Lower Appellate Court has upheld the judgement and order dated 27.11.1998 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate,Jaunpur in Criminal Case No.2244 of 1997 (State Vs. Hriday Narain Pandey) by which the trial Court has convicted and sentenced the revisionist for the six months R.I. under Section 406 I.P.C. and further imposed a fine of Rs.5,000/- and in default of payment of fine, he shall undergo nine months R.I. Brief facts of the present case are, that an FIR was lodged by Bharat Singh Azad, Branch Manager, National Small Scale Industries Corporation Ltd. (Government of India undertaking), Kanpur (hereinafter referred to as 'the Corporation) on 1.3.1986 mentioning that the accused Hriday Narain Pandey was given five machines, namely, Tradel Printing Machine, Cutting Machine, Wire Stiching Machine, Perforating Machine, Electric Machine by the Corporation under Higher Purchase Agreement. According to the said agreement, after paying the entire loan amount, the accused would become the absolute owner of the said machines and in default of payment by the accused, the said machines would be the property of the Government of India. There were seven instalments outstanding on the accused. By registered letter, demand was sent to him for paying the outstanding amount but he did not pay the same. On 1.3.1986, the informant found that the accused has sold Cutting Machine worth Rs. 8000/-, thus, the accused has committed breach of trust of the property of the Government of India, for which the informant gave a written application at Police Station Jaunpur for lodging an FIR. The informant further sealed the printing press of the accused. The prosecution also submitted a report that during the investigation of the present case, the accused broke the seal and lock and also sold the rest of the machines for which an FIR was lodged on 7.8.1987, which is marked as Exhibit Ka-3. After investigation, the Investigating Officer submitted a charge sheet against the accused Hriday Narain and charges were framed against him by Chief Judicial Magistrate for offence under Section 406 I.P.C. on 18.5.1992. The prosecution examined PW1-K.P.Singh to support the prosecution story before the Trial Court. The prosecution in support of its has filed higher purchase agreement (Exhibit Ka-4), FIR ( Exhibit Ka-5) and Site Plan (Exhibit Ka-6).
(3.) THE statement of accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was recorded by the trial Court in which he has admitted that there was a higher purchase agreement between him and the Corporation. He further stated that a wrong FIR has been lodged against him and in his defence he has produced notice (Exhibit Ka-1) and receipts (Exhibit Kha-2 to Exhibit Kha-4). The trial Court after examining the prosecution evidence as well as the defence submitted by the accused revisionist, came to the conclusion that the accused has committed an offence under Section 406 I.P.C. and the prosecution has proved its case beyond reasonable doubts. The trial Court found that the accused when failed to pay the outstanding amount to the Corporation, he sold Cutting Machine and further the printing press of the revisionist was sealed by the authorities on 1.3.1986. He had applied for the release of the said machines from the Court and the Sessions Judge vide order dated 17.5.1986 directed for release of the machine in favour of the revisionist, subject to the condition that he would furnish a bank guarantee of Rs.30,000/-, but the revisionist did not furnish the said bank guarantee. Thereafter the revisionist broke the lock and seal and sold rest of the machines which were the property of the Corporation and committed an offence of criminal breach of trust.;