JUDGMENT/ORDER :

Common Prayer: These Criminal Revision Petitions have been filed under Section 397 and 401 of Cr.P.C., to set aside the Common judgment of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore passed in C.A, 147 of 2014 and C.A. 49 of 2015. The Criminal Revision Petition in CRl.R.C. 127 of 2018 has been filed to setaside the reversal Judgment of acquittal passed by the Learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore and to confirm the conviction judgment of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Valparai made in CC No.69 of 2005. The Crl.R.C. 128 of 2018 has been filed to set aside the Judgment passed in C.A. 49/2015, by which the prayer to enhance the sentence was dismissed.

1. These Criminal Revision Petitions have been filed by the defacto complainant, to set aside the Common judgment of the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore passed in C.A.No.147 of 2014 and C.A.No. 49 of 2015. The Criminal Revision Petition in CRl.R.C. 127 of 2018 has been filed to setaside the reversal Judgment of acquittal passed by the Learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Coimbatore and to confirm the judgment of the learned District Munsif Cum Judicial Magistrate, Valparai made in CC No.69 of 2005. The Crl.R.C.No. 128 of 2018 has been filed to set aside the Judgment passed by the same Court in C.A.No.49/2015, by which the prayer to enhance the sentence was dismissed.

2. The brief facts of the case of the prosecution:

The defacto complainant is the Criminal Revision Petitioner in both the Criminal Revision cases. A-1 and A-2 were working as Section Officer and Assistant Section Officer in Anaimudi Estate, Mudis. The Estate is owned by the Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited and the Estate in-charge is A-1/Manuel. He is responsible for maintaining the cash book, journals and other accounts pertaining to payments made towards the disbursement of salary to the staff etc., A-2 is the person in-charge for raising indent for weekly expenses and he is also responsible for managing the cash affairs of the Estate along with A-1.

2.1. Both the accused entered into a conspiracy between themselves and inflated the expenses of the Estate by fabricating vouchers and falsifying the accounts pertaining to the period from April 1999- January-2000 and thereby misappropriated a sum of Rs.22,07,582.56 during the period between April- 1999 to January 2000.

3. On the compliant dated 29.05.2010, given by one Andrew D White, Manager of Annaimudi Estate of the Bombay Burma Trading Corporation Limited., a case in Cr.No.8/2000 of District Crime Branch, Coimbatore for the offences under Sec.120(b), 408, 477 and 420 IPC, and FIR (Ex.P.51). was prepared.

4. PW.6/ Investigation Officer took up the case for investigation and examined the witnesses and also obtained the samples of signatures and short signatures from the complainant/Andrew D White and the accused; thereafter the sample signatures and the disputed documents were sent to the Court for forensic examination.

5. After completing the investigation, charge sheet was filed against the accused under Sec. 120(b), 408, 477 and 420 IPC. However the Court had taken cognizance of the case against the accused under Sec.408 and 477 (A) IPC alone.

6. After complying due legal mandates, charges have been framed against the accused under Sec.408 and 477(A) IPC. When questioned; the accused denied the charges and claimed to be tried.

7. During the course of trial 6 witnesses have been examined as PW.1 to PW.6 and 59 documents, marked as Ex.P.1 to 59. No witness was examined and no document is marked.

8. After concluding the trial and on consideration of the materials available on record, the learned trial Judge found the accused guilty for the offences under Sec.407 and 477 (A) IPC and convicted them and sentenced them as under: