Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
The Deputy Director vs The State Of A.P. 5 Others on 3 March, 2022
HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K.SURESH REDDY
CRL.R.C.274 of 2008
ORDER:-
Questioning the order of acquittal passed by the Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada, in C.C.No.110 of 2001,
dated 26.06.2007, the petitioner filed the present Criminal
Revision Case.
2. Heard Sri M.Vidya Sagar, learned Standing Counsel for the
petitioner and Sri Soora Venkata Sainath, learned Special
Assistant Public Prosecutor.
3. The case of the prosecution is that Accused No.1 is
working as UD Clerk and A2 is working as Junior Accounts
Officer, Training Institute, Vijayawada Thermal Power Station
(for short 'VTPS'), Ibrahimpatnam, Krishna District. P.W.1 is the
Deputy Director of the said Training Institute. Assistant Engineer
(for short 'AE') trainees have attended for training course at
VTPS from 08.01.1996 to 15.05.1996, for which, an amount of
Rs.3,500/- was sanctioned towards stipend to each AE trainee.
During the period of training, Accused No.1 prepared the pay
bills and P.W.1 submitted change returns to Accused No.2 for
passing the bills and Accused No.1 was entrusted to attend the
Accounts Office for passing the stipend salary bills of training
AEs. Accordingly, Accused No.1 submitted change returns from
the month of January-1996 along with pay bills to Junior
Accounts Officer i.e., A2. Likewise, till 15.05.1996 the amounts
were drawn to a tune of Rs.8,92,424-05 ps., Accused No.1
2
continued in submission of pay bills with his own hand writings
by submitting forged change returns of P.W.1 and managed the
passing of pay bills from 16.05.1996 to 5/1997 and thereby
misappropriated an amount of Rs.9,01,242/- by forging the
signatures of P.W.1. Based on the report given by P.W.1, police,
Ibrahimpatnam Police Station registered a case in Cr.No.195 of
1997 for the offences under Sections 468, 471 and 409 IPC and
after completion of investigation, they filed charge sheet. The
case was taken on file as C.C.No.110 of 2001 on the file of Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada.
4. In support of its case, the prosecution examined Pws.1 to
12 and marked Exs.P-1 to P-6. Accused Nos.1 & 2 were
examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C., for which, they denied and
reported no evidence. So far as Accused Nos.3 to 5 are
concerned, they were discharged from the case by the trial Court
under Section 239 Cr.P.C.,
5. After an elaborate trial, the learned Magistrate acquitted
respondent Nos.2 & 3 by judgment, dated 26.06.2007.
Aggrieved by the same, the petitioner filed the present revision
case.
6. This Court has perused the entire evidence of P.W.1. As
seen from the record, P.W.1 in his cross-examination admitted
that all the trainee engineers were under his control and during
the relevant period, he has not verified the disbursing list. He
also admitted in the cross-examination that all trainee AEs have
received stipend. Furthermore, the allegation that Accused No.1
has forged the signatures of P.W.1 and committed the offence of
misappropriation, cannot be accepted as the prosecution did not
take any steps to send the disputed signatures to hand-writing
expert before the trial Court. It is also a fact that P.W.1 was the
co-delinquent along with Accused No.1 in the Departmental
Enquiry and an order of punishment was passed against P.W.1,
withholding two increments with cumulative effect. In view of
the above fact, the evidence of P.W.1 does not inspiring
confidence of this Court. Except the evidence of P.W.1, the
evidence of other prosecution witnesses is not at all helpful to
the prosecution to connect the accused with the said offences.
Therefore, taking into consideration all these aspects, the
learned Magistrate has acquitted the accused for the alleged
offences. In that view of the matter, this court is of the
considered view that there are no merits warranting interference
of this Court with the impugned order of acquittal and hence, the
present revision case is liable to be dismissed.
7. IN THE RESULT, the Criminal Revision Case is dismissed as
devoid of any merit, confirming the judgment of acquittal, dated
26.06.2007 in C.C.No.110 of 2001, passed by the Chief
Metropolitan Magistrate, Vijayawada.
Miscellaneous Petitions pending, if any, shall stand closed
in consequence.
__________________
K.SURESH REDDY,J
03rd March,2022.
RPD
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE K. SURESH REDDY
CRIMINAL REVISION CASE No.274 of 2008
Dated : 03-03-2022
RPD
