Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM AT GANGTOK
SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.
Prem Singh Tamang (Golay), S/o Kalu Singh Tamang - Appellant
Versus
State of Sikkim - Respondent
Crl. A. No. 01, 02 of 2017
Decided on : 28-06-2017
Misappropriation - Criminal Breach of Trust - IPC 403, 406, 120B(2) - PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii) - 403, 406, 120B(2) - A-1 convicted under IPC 403, 406, 120B(2) and PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii) - A-2 convicted under IPC 406, 403, 120B(2) and acquitted under PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii) - Conviction and sentencing of A-1 affirmed and upheld - A-2's conviction under IPC 403 and PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii) set aside - A-2's sentence under IPC 406 reduced to six months and fine affirmed - A-2's conviction under IPC 120B(2) upheld - A-2's appeal allowed to the above extent - A-1's appeal dismissed - All sentences to run concurrently
Fact of the Case:
The case involved misappropriation and criminal breach of trust of funds meant for the purchase and distribution of milch cows by the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services Department, Government of Sikkim. A-1 and A-2 were convicted for their involvement in the misappropriation of funds.
Finding of the Court:
The court found A-1 guilty of misappropriation and criminal breach of trust under IPC 403, 406, 120B(2) and PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii). A-2 was convicted under IPC 406, 403, 120B(2) and acquitted under PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii). The court affirmed and upheld the conviction and sentencing of A-1, while setting aside A-2's conviction under IPC 403 and PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii). A-2's sentence under IPC 406 was reduced to six months and the fine was affirmed. A-2's conviction under IPC 120B(2) was upheld. A-2's appeal was allowed to the above extent, and A-1's appeal was dismissed. All sentences were to run concurrently.
Issues: The main issues revolved around the misappropriation of funds meant for the purchase and distribution of milch cows, the involvement of A-1 and A-2 in the misappropriation, and the application of relevant sections of the IPC and PC Act.
Ratio Decidendi: The court found A-1 and A-2 guilty of misappropriation and criminal breach of trust based on the evidence presented, including the issuance of cheques in favor of non-suppliers of milch cows and the subsequent encashment of the cheques. The court also considered the role of A-1 as the Minister-in-charge and the actions of A-2 as the Managing Director in the misappropriation of funds. The court set aside A-2's conviction under PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii) and reduced A-2's sentence under IPC 406 while affirming the fine. A-2's conviction under IPC 120B(2) was upheld.
Final Decision: The court affirmed and upheld the conviction and sentencing of A-1, while setting aside A-2's conviction under IPC 403 and PC Act 13(2), 13(1)(d)(ii). A-2's sentence under IPC 406 was reduced to six months and the fine was affirmed. A-2's conviction under IPC 120B(2) was upheld. A-2's appeal was allowed to the above extent, and A-1's appeal was dismissed. All sentences were to run concurrently.
SATISH K. AGNIHOTRI, J.
1. Both the appeals are directed against the common judgment and order of sentence dated 28.12.2016 in Sessions Trial (Vig.) Case No.02 of 2009 (05 of 2013), whereby and whereunder the appellant in Crl. A. No.01 of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “A – 1”) was convicted of the offences under Section 403; Section 120B (2) read with Sections 403/406 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (in short, “IPC”) (in regard to cheque Nos.208236 and 208249) and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (in short, “PC Act”) (in regard to the amounts concerning with the said cheques and other cheques encashed through PW-40). A-1 was sentenced to undergo SI for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand) only, in default to pay fine to further undergo further SI for a period of six months for the substantive offence committed under Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act. Further he was sentenced to undergo SI for a period of one year under Section 403 IPC and he was also sentenced to undergo SI for a period of six months under Section 120B(2) read with Sections 403/406 of the IPC. The appellant in Crl. A. No.02 of 2017 (hereinafter referred to as “A – 2”) was convicted of the offences under Section 406 IPC (in respect of cheque No.208249); Section 403 IPC (in reference to cheque No.208236) and Section 120B(2) read with Section 403/406 IPC/Section 13(1)(d)(ii)/(2) of the PC Act. He was sentenced to undergo SI for a period of one year and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/- (Rupees Five thousand) only for an offence committed under Section 406 IPC. In default to pay fine amount, to further undergo SI for a period of three months. A-2 was further sentenced under Section 403 IPC to undergo SI for a period of eight months and for offence under Section 120B(2) read with Sections 403/406 IPC/Section 13(1)(d)(ii)/(2) of the PC Act to undergo SI for a period of six months. Thus, both the appeals are being considered together.
2. The provenance of filing of charge-sheet against A - 1 and 2 for allegedly having committed offences under Sections 468/120B(2) IPC; Sections 420/120B(2) IPC; Sections 403/120B(2) IPC; Sections 409/120B(2) IPC; and Sections 13(1)(d)(ii)/13(2) of the PC Act and other persons, namely, Keshu Agarwal (A - 3), Subash Tamang (A - 4) and Sanjay Agarwal (A - 5) for committing offences under Sections 468/120B(2) IPC; Sections 420/120B(2) IPC; and Sections 403/120B(2) IPC, was in pursuance of the order dated 04.03.2003 passed by this High Court in Writ Petitions No.03/98, 05/98, 03/99 & 06/99, wherein the Vigilance Department was permitted to register a regular case for alleged irregularities committed in respect of the purchase and distribution of milch cows by the Animal Husbandry & Veterinary Services (AH&VS) Department, Government of Sikkim. A Sikkim Vigilance Police Station (SVPS) Case No.RC-1/2003 was registered by the Vigilance Police on 12.03.2003 for the offences as afore-stated against A - 1 and 2 along with other three persons.
3. The learned trial Judge, on examination and appreciation of several witnesses produced by the Prosecution, held as under:-
“62. Resultantly, the Prosecution case partly succeeds so far as the accused Nos. 1 & 2 are concerned. The accused No. 1 is, accordingly, convicted of the offences under Section 403; Section 120B(2) read with Sections 403/406 of the IPC, 1860 (with regard to the amounts concerning cheque Nos. 208236 & 208249); and Section 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d)(ii) of the PC Act, 1988 (with regard to the amounts concerning the above cheques and the other cheques encashed through PW 40). The accused No. 2 is convicted of the offences under Section 406 (with regard to amount concerning cheque No. 208249); Section 403 (with regard to amount concerning cheque No.208236); & Section 120B(2) read with Section 403/406 IPC/Section 13(1)(d)(ii).(2) of the PC Act
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
