Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU
G.Basavaraja
M. Balaji, S/O. Muniyappa – Appellant
Versus
State Of Karnataka, Rep. By Sub Inspector Of Police – Respondent
ORDER :
G Basavaraja, J.
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed by the accused against the Judgment of conviction and Order of sentence dated 24th March 2014, passed in CC No.79 of 2008 by the Principal Civil Judge & JMFC, Mulbagal (for short “the trial Court”), which is confirmed by I Additional Sessions Judge, Kolar (for short “the appellate Court) in Criminal Appeal No.28 of 2014 dated 6th February, 2018.
2. For the sake of convenience, the parties herein referred to as per their rank before the trial Court.
3. Facts leading to this revision petition are that the Police Sub-Inspector, Mulbagal, submitted charge-sheet against the accused for offence punishable under Section 408 of INDIAN PENAL CODE . It is alleged by the prosecution that from 30th January, 1999 to 28th September, 2004, the accused was working as Branch Postmaster at Kothamangala Branch Post Office and during that period, the accused has dishonestly misappropriated the amount deposited by the customers. The same is as under:
“a) Not remitted Rs.4,200/- to the government deposited by CW.2-K.Narayanappa from 12.5.2003 to 20.9.2004 to his SB Account No. 193031.
b) Not remitted Rs.2,000/- out of Rs.2,250/- to the govern
Prosecution must present cogent evidence to establish misappropriation under Section 409; failure to meet burden results in acquittal.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for a public servant accused of criminal breach of trust to prove the entrustment and discharge of the obligation, as well as the l....
Public servants misappropriating funds and failing to remit them can be convicted under the PC Act and IPC. The absence of documentation does not exempt accountability for the misappropriation.
Revisional jurisdiction under CrPC 401 limited; no evidence re-appreciation unless miscarriage of justice. Conviction under IPC 409 for Property Clerk's misappropriation upheld on entrustment proof v....
The Court upheld the conviction and sentence for criminal misappropriation under Section 408 of IPC, emphasizing the importance of entrustment and the duty of an employee to work with devotion when f....
An error in the charge framed by the trial court under Section 212 of the CrPC will not be regarded as material unless it misleads the accused or occasions a failure of justice.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the act of misappropriation can be considered part of official duty, requiring prior sanction for prosecution under Section 197 of Cr.P.C.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that a public servant can be held liable for criminal misconduct and breach of trust under relevant legal provisions, and the court has the discret....
A person cannot be charged with both cheating and criminal breach of trust for the same transaction; the prosecution must prove the specific elements of each offence beyond reasonable doubt.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
