- (1.)THE applicant is convicted by the Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Goharganj, of an offence Under Section 409, I. P. C, and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 200/- or in default to suffer further rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. His appeal was dismissed.
(2.)THE case for the prosecution was that the applicant was a Forest Guard at village Dungaria Tehsil Goharganj and in his such capacity recovered Rs. 15/8/- on 15-3-1950 from one Kashiram Contractor for 'mahua and Achar' and passed a receipt therefor. He, however, never credited the amount either at the Range Office or with the Treasury and dishonestly appropriated it to himself. Tie was prosecuted for an offence Under Section 409, IPC In defence he denied having ever received the amount from Kashiram though he admitted his signature on the receipt. His explanation is that lie had signed the document in token of his check of the 'ravanna' on the reverse of the said document. On the evidence on record the learned Magistrate overruled the defence and convicted him as above.
(3.)IR. this Court it is not urged that the explanation given by the applicant may he true as there is a 'ravanna' on the back of the receipt, that the receipt was in Hindi script which the applicant did not know and that: fact should be held enough to justify an inference that the applicant did not know the contents, that the omission to examine George Pedro another attesting witness on the reciept should lead to an inference adverse to the prosecution and lastly that the prosecution of the applicant Under Section 409 was bad in law in view of Section 5 (1) (c), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947, and the applicant was prejudiced thereby.
;