JUDGMENT

Das, J. - The two appellants in the two appeals, No. 407 of 1942 and 409 of 1942 which have been heard together, were tried at one trial before one of the Honorary Presidency Magistrates of Calcutta. There was one joint charge against both the appellants u/s 120B read with Sections 408 and 414 for having, between March 1940 and June 1940, conspired with one Lal Chand to commit offences under Sections 408 and 414, Penal Code. There were eight separate charges (a) to (h) u/s 408 read with Section 109, Penal Code, for having aided and abetted Lal Chand to commit criminal breach of trust as servant in respect of eight several cheques entrusted to Lal Chand by the complainant's firm of Sohon Lal Mohon Lal and yet another eight separate charges (i) to (p) u/s 414 read with Section 109, Penal Code, for having voluntarily assisted in the disposal of stolen property, to wit the same eight cheques belonging to the complainant knowing or having reason to believe the same to be stolen property. The charges (a) and (i) were directed against the appellant Keshabdeo and the charges (b) to (h) and (j) to (p) concerned the appellant Harnandan. The prosecution out of which the present appeals have arisen was initiated by a petition of complaint (Ex. 62) filed on 13th July 1942 before the Additional Chief Presidency Magistrate by one Mohon Lal Banthia on behalf of Sohan Lal Mohon Lal of No. 14/2, Old China Bazar Street, Calcutta, against three persons, namely, Lal Chand, Harnandan and Keshabdeo. The substance of this petition of complaint was as follows:

The complainant was the proprietor of the firm of Sohon Lal Mohon Lal. Lal Chand was the cashier of his firm and Harnandan and Keshabdeo were friends of Lal Chand. Lal Chand used to keep books of accounts, receive money from the different constituents of the firm and sent them to the firm's bankers, viz. Yokohama Specie Bank and Mercantile Bank of India, after duly crediting such sums in the books of account of the firm. On 28th June 1940 the complainant found certain discrepancies in the cash book and called for an explanation from Lal Chand but the latter could not give any satisfactory explanation. Complainant thereupon asked Lal Chand to come early on the next day for verification of the entries in the cash book. On coming to the office next morning (29th June 1940), which was a Saturday, the complainant, to his utter surprise, found one table and some books and papers burnt to ashes and the cash books and suspense book missing. On enquiry he learnt from the Darwan of the landlord that he had seen Lal Chand going out of the office on the previous night with a bundle. Lal Chand not having turned up in the office the complainant sent his Darwan to Lal Chand's place to fetch him. The Darwan came back and reported that Lal Chand was unwell and would be late in coming to office. At the end of the day Lal Chand came and on being questioned denied any knowledge of the fire but admitted having taken the cash book and suspense account book for checking and promised to bring them on Monday (1st July 1940). On Monday Lal Chand did not turn up. The complainant became suspicious and sent his manager Kanyalal to bring the books and to ask Lal Chand to come to the office at once. Kanyalal came back and reported that neither the books nor Lal Chand could be found. Lal Chand has ever since remained absconding. The complainant grew more suspicious and on enquiry from different constituents and banks, found that Lal Chand had defalcated large sums of money having been aided and abetted by Harnandan and Keshabdeo who often used to come to the complainant's office. Particulars of four several items of defalcation of moneys covered by four several cheques to which I shall revert later on were set out in para. 10 of this petition. It was alleged that the complainant had been credibly informed that Keshabdeo had received several cheques amounting to about us. 11,000 from Lal Chand and converted the same. The