The return of misappropriated funds does not absolve criminal liability but strengthens the prosecution's case, with the court emphasizing the right to a speedy trial as part of fair legal processes.

JUDGMENT :

Prasenjit Biswas, J.

1. The present appeal is directed against the impugned judgment and order of conviction dated 31.07.2015 passed by the learned Additional Dist. & Sessions Judge, 2nd Court, Hooghly in connection with Special Case No. 3 of 2009 corresponding to CIS no. 64/14.

2. By passing the impugned judgment this appellant was found guilty for commission of offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code and was sentenced to suffer simple imprisonment for a term of six months along with a fine of Rs. 5,000/-, in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisonment for one month.

3. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the said impugned judgment and order of conviction, the present appeal is filed at the behest of the appellant convict.

4. In short campus, the story of the prosecution is delineated hereunder-

“The accused Sri Bharat Chandra Mete was the Sub-Post Master in Saidpur Post Office since 14.01.2000. The defacto complainant Sri Ashit Kumar Mukherjee, Sub-Divisional Inspector (Postal), Chinsurah West Sub Division, Chinsurah, Hooghly received a telephonic information from the superintendent of Post Office, North Hooghly Division Chinsurah, Hooghly in the evening of 31.08.2004 to the effect for verification of cash and stamp balances of Saidpur Sub- Post Office. Accordingly, he rushed to the Saidpur Sub-Post Office in the morning of 01.09.2004 and the accused was directed to produce office cash and stamp balances for verification before starting of work of office. The accused produced the cash and stamp balances of the Sub-Post Office for verification. As per office account of Saidpur Sub- Post Office, the opening cash and stamp balances was on 01.09.2004 to the tune of Rs. 4,48,2666.65/- but on physical verification the total cash and stamp balances of the Sub-Post Office was found for Rs. 61,167.50/-. So, there is a sum of Rs. 3,87,099.15/- was found short in the cash and stamp balances as per physical verification. It is said in written complaint that on asking the accused, he failed to explain the reason of the shortage. Over the incident a written complaint was lodged by the defacto complainant. It is said in the written complaint that the accused defalcated the government cash and stamp of Rs. 3,87,099.15/- for his personal purpose. Over the complaint a case being Pursura P.S. Case No. 79/04 dated 08.09.2004 under Section 409 IPC was started.”

5. After completion of investigation charge sheet was submitted by the prosecuting agency against this accused person under Section 409 of IPC.

6. The charge was framed by the Trial Court against the accused under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. In this case 8 witnesses were examined by the side of the prosecution and documents were marked as exhibited on his behalf. On the other hand one witness was adduced from the side of the defence as DW1 and the documents were marked as Exhibit A series on behalf of the accused person.

7. Mr. Tapas Kumar Ghosh, learned Advocate appearing for the appellant has said that this appellant had already returned the defalcated amount on different dates and as such this accused may be absolved from the liability under Section 409 of IPC. In support of his contention the learned Advocate placed reliance upon an decision rendered by the Single bench of the Hon’ble High Court at Madhya Pradesh in case of State of Madhya Pradesh vs. Prempal , 1991 CRI L J 2878. It is further cont