- (1.) P. K. Jain, J. Aggrieved by the judg ment and order dated 12- 5-1995 passed by III Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh acquitting the respondent of the charge under Section 409, IPC, the State has filed this appeal.
(2.) HEARD learned AGA and Sri I. M. Khan, learned Counsel for the respon dent. In the year 1983 the respondent was working as Assistant Cashier in the U. P. State Road Transport Corporation and was posted at Aligarh. On the night between 11/12-12-83 between 9. 00 p. m. to 1. 00 p. m. he was on duty as Assistant Cashier and was incharge of the cash at the Aligarh Depot, of the U. P. S. R. T. C. A sum of Rs. 1,57,317. 40 paisa was allegedly em bezzled by him during this period. It is the case of the prosecution that the respon dent was on duty between 9. 00 p. m. to 1. 00 a. m. and thereafter he went away after locking the cash coffer and cashiers room. On 12-12-83 when he returned to duty at about 9. 00 a. m. he reported to the Station Incharge that the aforesaid sum was miss ing from the cash coffer. After the matter was reported to the Adhikshak, he lodged the report dated 12-12-83 on the basis of which a case under Section 409, IPC was registered. After usual investigation the respondent was charge-sheeted to stand trial under Section 409, IPC. The trial Court framed the charge under Section 409, IPC which was denied by the respon dent. In his statement under Section 313, Cr. PC. the respondent admitted to be on duty during the aforesaid period but he stated that he did not embezzle the money. On 12-12-83 when he reached the office, he found that cash was stolen from the coffer and Sri Manak Singh, Station Su perintendent, under pressure of higher of ficers, lodged a false report in order to save his skin. He also denied to have been entrusted with any money by Mohd. Idrish Khan, the Assistant Cashier, from whom he had taken the charge. He further stated that when he came to the office in the morning, he found the coffer open and, therefore, reported the matter to the proper authorities.
(3.) THE prosecution, in support of its case, examined P. W. 1 Satya Prakash Arya, Senior Accountant, P. W. 2 Manak Singh, Station Incharge, P. W. 3 Ashok Kumar Jain, Regional Manager, PW 4 Ashok Kumar Duva, Kshetriya Pravandhak, P. W. 5 Mohd. Idrish Khan, P. W. 6 Shankar Lal, P. W. 7 Satya Pal Singh and P. W. 8 Dharam Veer Singh, S. I. THE respondent did not examine any witness in his defence. The trial Court after consideration of the evidence, came to the conclusion that the possibility of theft was not ruled out and hence allegations of embezzle ment was not proved beyond doubt and secondly prosecution was barred by Sec tion 197, Cr. PC. The trial Court, there fore, acquitted the accused respondent of the charge under Section 409, IPC.;