Judgment

JUDGMENT:- These appeals by special leave are directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court by which the conviction of the appellant under Section 409 Indian Penal Code on three counts have been affirmed.

2. The facts of the case have been detailed in the judgments of the trial court and the High Court and it is not necessary to repeat the same.

3. According to the prosecution, the appellant who was an overseer was put incharge of tubewells and some open godowns which were attached to those tubewells. These godowns contained cement, bricks and coal. Although the High Court has found that the articles in the godowns were entrusted to the appellant, there is no evidence at all to show that any such entrustment was made. No document in the nature of a list or charge has been shown to show that physical charge of the articles after being regularly counted in the godowns was made over to the appellant. This fact has not been seriously disputed by Mr. Bhat, appearing for the State. In fact, the godowns were in the physical charge of Chowkidars and if there was any shortage it was not the appellant but the Chowkidars who would be liable. Even assuming that some sort of e