SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1956 Supreme(All) 168

V.BHARGAVA, SAHAI
SURENDRA PAL SINGH – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
Jagdish Sahay, SHRI RAMA

V. BHARGAVA, J.


( 1 ) THIS is a revision filed by one Surendra Pal Singh who has been convicted for an offence punishable under Section 409, Penal Code, and sentenced to one years rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 250/- and, in default of payment of fine, to three months further rigorous imprisonment.

( 2 ) THE findings of fact recorded by the lower appellate court are that the applicant realised a sum of Rs. 596/14/- from certain cultivators on account of canal dues in his capacity as extra canal amin and deposited only a sum of Rs. 398/4/6 out of it in the Government treasury. The excess sum of Rs. 198/9/6 was not deposited in the treasury, though it was realised from the cultivators. The circumstances justify the presumption that this amount had been misappropriated by the applicant. It further appears that the sum of Rs. 596/14/-realised by the applicant was not really due from those cultivators as canal dues. The sum due was Rs. 398/4/8 and that was the sum which, after realisation, was deposited by the applicant in the Government treasury. The amount of Rs. 198/9/6, which was misappropriated by the applicant, had been realised by him from the cultivators representing th






Click Here to Read the rest of this document

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top