Back
2018 Supreme(Mad) 3127
BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT
G. JAYACHANDRAN, J.
SELVARAJ — Appellant
Vs.
STATE OF TAMIL NADU — Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 15 of 2013
Decided on : 11-10-2018
Advocate Appeared:
M. Jegadeesh Pandian, A. Robinson, Adv.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the interpretation and application of key provisions of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) related to misappropriation and falsification of accounts.
Headnote:
Misappropriation - Criminal Law - IPC 408, 420, 468, 477(A) - The court discussed the misappropriation of funds by the appellant through falsifying accounts and creating false vouchers. The key legal provisions of IPC 408, 420, 468, and 477(A) were interpreted in the context of the appellant's actions, leading to the court's decision to dismiss the revision case.
Fact of the Case:
The appellant, a clerk in a society, was accused of misappropriating funds by falsifying accounts and creating false vouchers. The trial court found him guilty, and the conviction was confirmed on appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found the appellant guilty of misappropriation and falsification of accounts based on specific transactions and entries in the records.
Issues: The issues revolved around the appellant's alleged misappropriation of funds, the validity of the evidence presented by the prosecution, and the appellant's attempt to shift blame to another individual responsible for the misappropriation.
Ratio Decidendi: The court relied on specific transactions and entries in the records to establish the appellant's guilt, while rejecting the appellant's attempt to shift blame to another individual. The court also upheld the findings of the trial court and the appellate court.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the criminal revision case, affirming the judgment and conviction passed by the trial court and the appellate court.
G.Jayachandran, J.
This Criminal Revision Petition is filed against the judgment and conviction passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Fast Track Court, No.2, Madurai in Crl.A.Nos.19 of 2011 confirming the Judgment of Judicial Magistrate - III, Madurai in C.C.Nos.148 of 2008.
2. The case of the prosecution is that the appellant herein, while working as clerk in Muthu Weavers Society Ltd., T.Slubbulapuram, Andipatti during the year 2004-05 in connivance with other staff of the society has misappropriated the funds of the society by falsifying the accounts. The specific allegations made against the appellant in this case is that on 15.12.2014 he made false entries in the account as if Rs. 10,000/- was received by the Murugan Weavers Cooperative Society. Further, he created 26 vouchers on various dates between 07.06.2004 to 18.03.2005 and misappropriated a sum of Rs. 41,685.90/-.
3. Further it is also alleged that without any voucher, the Society's fund was misappropriated by entering expenses of Rs. 50,000 and Rs. 76,637.60/- to misappropriate a total sum of Rs. 1,26,327.60/-. This appellant was charged for offence under Section 408 , 420, 468 & 477(A) IPC along with other accused. The trial Court found him guilty after considering the evidences let in by the prosecution. On appeal, the conviction and sentence passed by the trial Court was confirmed. Therefore, the present appeal is filed by the appellant on the false grounds.
4. Learned counsel for the revision petitioner/appellant would submit that P.W.8 Sivanandi, was responsible for the entire misappropriation. While so, the prosecution has examined him as a witness instead of arraying him as an accused. The day book, Ex.P.20 and the accounts have been verified by P.W.8 Sivanandi and he has affixed his signature. While so, belatedly, holding the appellant for misappropriation without holding Sivanandi, who has counter signed the account is evident of biased investigation. It is submitted that the evidence of P.W.5, who has conducted enquiry under the Cooperative Society Act was not properly appreciated by the trial Court as well as the Appellate Court and therefore, the appellant is entitled for acquittal.
5. Per contra, the learned Government Advocate(Criminal side) would submit that P.W.5 has conducted enquiry under Section 81 of the Cooperative Societies Act and has gone through the records and accounts and submitted his report, Ex.P.7, wherein the misappropriation of the Society fund by the appellant herein has been found and proved to the record. The accountant and cashier of the Society were jointly incharge of the cash and stock of the Society. The stocks of the Society was administered by one Muthu Kamatchi. Registers were manipulated as if yarn were distributed to the members and a sum of Rs. 3,16,340/- stands outstanding.
6. The specific case of prosecution through its witnesses is that on 15.12.2004, the appellant had falsely made account as if Rs. 10,000/- given to Murugan Weaving Society. Further, with intention to misappropriate the funds of the Society falsely created 26 vouchers without signatures and misappropriated Rs. 41,685.00/- As per receipt No.534, a sum of Rs. 2,000/- not accounted. As sum of Rs. 3,000/- towards expenses falsely entered as per voucher No.437 instead of Rs. 500/- towards expenses, the accused entered as Rs. 3,500/- and appropriated the money.
7. Heard the learned counsel for the appellant and learned Government Advocate for the State and records perused..
8. To prove the charges against the appellant, the prosecution has examined 8 witnesses, marked 65 exhibits and on behalf of the defence, two exhibits were marked. The trial Court after considering the evidence for prosecution has found the appellant Selvaraj guilty of offences under Sections 408 & 477(A) along with co-accused Ganapathy, as far as the charge under Section 468 was acquitted.
9. The trial has considered the evidence of P.W.5 who has conducted the enquiry under s
