Jharkhand High Court
Dwijendra Nath Sindhu vs The State Of Jharkhand on 16 August, 2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
Cr. Revision No. 685 of 2002
-------
Dwijendra Nath Sindhu ...... .... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ..... .... Opp. Party
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AMBUJ NATH
--------
For the Petitioner : Mr. Suraj Singh, Advocate
For the State : Ms. Vandana Bharti, A.P.P
--------
07/ Dated 16.08.2023
Heard the parties.
The petitioner Dwijendra Nath Sindhu has filed this application
against the judgment dated 09.09.2002, passed by Sri Om Prakash Pandey,
learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad in Cr. Appeal No.22/1999,
whereby and wherein, learned Additional Sessions Judge-XI, Dhanbad
dismissed the appeal of the petitioner and upheld the judgment of conviction
and order of sentence dated 10.02.1999, passed by Sri C. Tanti, learned
Judicial Magistrate, 1st class, Dhanbad in connection with G.R Case No.
3441/1986, arising out of Jorapokhar P.S Case No. 498/1986, holding the
petitioner guilty of offence under Sections 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code and thereby, sentencing him to undergo R.I for three years for the
offence under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and R.I for two years
for the offence under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code. Both the
sentences were ordered to run concurrently.
The informant who is an agent of Bhowra (N) UG. Mines, lodged the
F.I.R on 14.11.1986, stating therein that he had received complaint from
several workers regarding non-payment of their different bills, although the
money was released by the cashier against those bills. It is alleged that the
money was handed over by the cashier to the petitioner who was the
payment clerk. When the matter was enquired into, it transpired that the
petitioner, after misappropriating the entire amount absconded from his
duty.
In order to prove its case, the prosecution has adduced both oral and
documentary evidence. Both the learned Trial Court and the learned
Appellate Court have come to a concurrent finding regarding the guilt of the
petitioner. The petitioner has also adduced oral evidence in support of his
case.
From perusal of the oral testimony of the prosecution witnesses, it
transpires that Janki Gope P.W.1, Baleshwar Sharma P.W.2, Sri Nath Rai
P.W.3, Shyam Lal Manjhi P.W.4, Palak Dhari Singh P.W.5, Krishna Giri
P.W.6, Haradhan Lohar P.W.7, Sita Ram Thakur P.W.8, Amrika Bagee
P.W.9, Ravishwar Manjhi P.W.10, Jagdish Sao P.W.11, Sharad Bouri P.W.12,
Fagu Mahto P.W.13, Juglu Pasi P.W.15, Barmanand Tiwary P.W.18, Baijnath
Mahto P.W.19, Baijnath Pandey P.W.20, Arun Mahto P.W.21, Raja Gareri
P.W.22, Madan Dhoba P.W.23, Lalchand Sah P.W.25, Sonu Turi P.W.26,
Ramdeo Mahto P.W.27, Madhu Bouri P.W.28, Ramadhar Kurmi P.W.29,
Gurupad Bouri P.W.30 and Fani Modak P.W.31, have stated that they had
presented their different bills relating to encashment of H.L.T.C. and
L.L.T.C. Their bills were cleared and the cashier had released the amount to
this petitioner for making payment, but the petitioner misappropriated the
amount and no money was given to them.
Ashok Kumar Singh P.W.16 has stated that in between July 1986 to
1988, he was posted as Senior Personal Officer in Bhowra North Colliery,
Dhanbad. He has produced the Payment Voucher Book No.1. He has proved
that altogether approved L.L.T.C Voucher of 41 persons and backwages of
six persons. He has further stated that the petitioner had misappropriated the
amount so released, for payment of L.L.T.C and the backwages to the
workers. He has further stated that an enquiry was conducted with regard to
the malpractice committed by the petitioner and he was found guilty in the
enquiry. He has proved the enquiry report which is Exhibit-2. He has proved
the typed report which is Exhibit-3.
He has been cross-examined at length. He has not been cross-
examined on the point that the petitioner had misappropriated the amount
which was handed over to him for payment of L.L.T.C and backwages to
the workers.
Saroj Kumar Chatterjee P.W.17 has stated that he was an Accountant
in Bhowra North colliery in the year 1982-89 and the petitioner Dwijendra
Nath Sindhu was clerk in that colliery. He has further stated that in the year
1986, money was released to the petitioner for making payment of L.L.T.C
and H.L.T.C wages and quarterly bonus payment to the workers but he did
not make the payment and misappropriated the amount. He has further
stated that petitioner had misappropriated Rs.3,05,000/- in all. He
has proved the receipts of money which was released to the petitioner for
making payments which have been marked at Exhibit-4 series.
The petitioner had examined himself and other witnesses in support
of his case that he has been falsely implicated in this case.
From the aforesaid oral and documentary evidence, it is evident that
the prosecution has been able to show that the petitioner was released more
than Rupees Three Lakhs for making payment to the workers against their
L.L.T.C, H.L.T.C, wages and bonus claim but the petitioner misappropriated
the entire amount and thereafter, he absconded.
In view of the aforesaid discussions, I am of the view that both the
learned Trial Court and the learned Appellate Court have rightly come to the
finding regarding the guilt of the petitioner. The sentence passed by the
learned trial court is proportionate to the gravity of the offence and does not
require any interference.
This revision application is accordingly, dismissed.
Pending I.A., if any, also stands disposed of.
BS/ (Ambuj Nath, J.)
