S. R. DAS GUPTA, J.

( 1 ) THIS is a petition for quashing the proceedings pending against the petitioners in the court of Sri S. B. Sarkar, Magistrate First Class, Alipore, 24-Parganas.

( 2 ) THE case made in the petition of complaint upon which the said proceedings have been started is as follows : The petitioner is a Kabiraj and was in charge of Asansol Branch of the opposite party, Dacca Ayurvedic Pharmacy Limited. It was the duty of the petitioner to enter the medicines received by him in the cash book and the stock book and he was to remit the sale proceeds and render weekly, monthly and periodical accounts, to the Head Office. From the cash book it has been found that the accused misappropriated Rs. 527-7-6 in the first week of January 1954 and has also misappropriated over Rs. 1742/- by introducing spurious medicines namely "makaradhwaj and Swarnasindur" and "rasasindur" in the stock of the company. Upon those allegations the present proceedings have been started against the petitioner.

( 3 ) THE ground, on which the said proceedings are sought to be quashed is that the criminal court at Alipore had no jurisdiction to try the alleged offence of the petitioner. The case against the petitioner was under Section 408, Penal Code, that is to say, criminal breach of trust by a clerk or a servant. The petitioner contends before us that in a case of criminal breach of trust or misappropriation the court competent to try the same would be the court situated at a place where the entrustment or the positive act of conversion took place. But in this case, it was alleged, the petition of complaint shows that the conversion and or the entrustment took place at Asansol and, therefore, the court at Asansol is the court competent to try this offence.

( 4 ) IN out opinion this contention of the petitioner is sound and should prevail. In determining the question as to whether or not the court at Alipore has jurisdiction to try this case, it would be necessary to consider certain provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The material provisions to be considered are sections 177, 179 and 181 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section 177 of the Code lays down that every offence shall ordinarily be inquired into and tried by a court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction it was committed. Then comes Section 179 which says that when a person is accused of the commission of any offence by reason of anything which has been done and of any consequence which has ensued, such offence may be inquired into or tried by a court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any such thing has been done or any such consequence has ensued. Section 181 (2) provides as follows :"the offence of criminal misappropriation or of criminal breach of trust may be inquired into or tried by a Court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any part of the property which is the subject of the offence was received or retained by the accused person, or the offence was committed. "i have already stated that the case against the petitioner is under Section 408, Penal Code, i. e. , criminal breach of trust by a clerk or a servant. On consideration of the said provisions of the criminal procedure it appears to us that the offence of criminal misappropriation or criminal breach of trust can be inquied into or tried by a court within the local limits of whose jurisdiction any part of the property was received or retained or the offence was committed. This is clear from the plain language of Section 181 (2) of the Cr. P. Code. In this case the petition of complaint clearly shows that the petitioner was in charge of the Asansol Branch of the company and while in the said charge he had received and misappropriated the sums mentioned in the said petition. It seems to be clear that in the petition of complaint the case made is that the entrustment and misappropriation or breach of trust look place at Asansol. So, on the averments made in the petition or co

Click Here to Read the rest of this document