Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
HON'BLE SHRI JUSTICE MADHAV J. JAMDAR
State of Maharshtra – Appellant
Versus
Dwarikaprasad Sitaram Mishra – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
[MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.]
1.Heard Mr. Shinde, learned APP for the Appellant – State and Ms. Rukmini Khairnar, learned Counsel for the Respondent Nos. 4 to 7.
2. By the present Criminal Appeal filed under Section 378(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC”), the challenge is to the legality and validity of the Judgment and Order dated 23rd May 2002 passed by the learned JMFC, IInd Court, Thane in RCC No.105 of 1994. By the impugned Judgment and Order the Accused have been acquitted under Section 248 of CrPC for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 468, 471 r/w 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“IPC”).
3. The prosecution case is set out in Paragraph Nos.2 to 4 of the impugned Judgment and Order of the learned Trial Court, which reads as under :-
“2. In brief the facts of the prosecution case are as under:-
Complainant namely Arun Shinde was working as an Administrative Officer in the Bayer India Company. In the year, 1992, the accused no.1 Dwarika Prasad Sitaram Mishra was secretary and accused no.2 Dayanand was Chairman, accused no.3 Ramchandra was a Treasurer, accused nos. 4 & 5 were the Accountants and the accused nos. 8 to 14 are the members of the Bayer Ind
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and can only overturn acquittals if the trial court's findings are perverse or unsupported by reasonable conclusions.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that suspicion cannot replace proof beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution must prove its case beyond reasonable doubt, and the trial court must ....
Partial deposit towards audit-found shortage by entrusted salesman does not admit guilt of criminal breach of trust; prosecution must prove dishonest misappropriation or personal use beyond doubt, es....
The presumption of innocence and the necessity of proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt were upheld, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.
The duty of the trial court to put each material circumstance to the accused and the requirement to seek an explanation from the accused regarding incriminating circumstances.
Point of Law : It is settled law that the Court can reverse the order of acquittal, if the judgment of the Trial Court is perverse and has not considered the material on record. I do not find any suc....
The conviction for misappropriation under Sections 403 and 409 IPC was upheld, confirming that the accused breached trust as a public servant responsible for collecting and depositing substantial gov....
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
