Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Jitendra Kumar
Birendra Kumar, Son of Bindeshwari Prasad – Appellant
Versus
State of Bihar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Jitendra Kumar, J.
Introduction
The present Criminal Revision Petition has been preferred by the Petitioner against the Judgment of conviction and order of sentence dated 30.07.2019 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Muzaffarpur in Cr. Appeal No. 9 of 2019, whereby learned Appellate Court has upheld the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by learned Trial Court of the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class-cum- Additional Munsif, Muzaffarpur (West), in Paroo P.S. Case No. 109 of 2009, corresponding to Trial No. 5405 of 2018, G.R. No. 1006 of 2009, whereby learned Trial Court had found the Petitioner guilty under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code sentencing him to undergo R.I. for three years and pay fine of Rs. 10,000/- and in default to pay the fine, he was further directed to undergo S.I. for three months.
Prosecution Case
2. The criminal proceeding was initiated on a letter written by Area Manager of North Bihar Gramin Bank, Muzaffarpur addressed to the Officer-in-charge, Police Station Paroo, Muzaffarpur against the petitioner herein who was Branch Manager of North Bihar Gramin Bank, Branch Sarmastpur.
3. The sum and substance of the allegation levelled by the Are
The prosecution must provide concrete evidence to prove allegations of criminal breach of trust; absence of critical documentation undermines a conviction under Section 409 IPC.
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....
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 a public servant can be held liable for criminal misconduct and breach of trust under relevant legal provisions, and the court has the discret....
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.
(1) Revisional court can interfere with findings of fact of lower court when they are perverse and not merely when another view is also possible.(2) Deciding an appeal without appreciating evidence i....
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.
(1) Misappropriation with dishonest intention is one of the most important ingredients of proof of ‘criminal breach of trust’.(2) Best evidence having been withheld by prosecution, benefit of doubt m....
The accused was convicted for misappropriating public funds by failing to account for money entrusted to her, establishing criminal breach of trust and corrupt practices under the relevant sections.
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
