( 1 ) THESE are two connected revisions arising out of the same conviction. Revision No. 1535 of 1953 is by the applicant Chiranji Lal who was convicted under Section 420 of the Indian Penal code and sentenced to four months rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 500/-, in default of payment of fine to a further rigorous imprisonment for two months; and the other connected revision, namely, Revision No. 2001 of 1953, is by Ajodhya Prasad, who was the complainant in the case in which Chiranji Lal was convicted.

( 2 ) THE facts of the case briefly stated were these:

( 3 ) CHIRANJI Lal, the applicant, was a business man who did some business at Mahoo in the district of Jaipur (Rajasthan ). It appears that he had a brother named Moti Lal who was known to a firm called Hiralal Ajodhya Prasad a firm of Commission Agents having an Arhat shop at shahjahanpur. Ajodhya Prasad and Bam Saroop (P. W. 7) were partners of this firm. It appears further that Moti Lal had some time done some business with firm Hira Lal Ajodhya Prasad. On the 31st of January, 1952, Chiranji Lal came to the shop of Ajodhya Prasad, i. e. , firm Hiralal ajodhya Prasad, at Shahjahanpur with a letter from Moti Lal. The letter was in the nature of a letter of introduction for Chiranji Lal to the firm owned by ajodhya Prasad in partnership with another, namely, firm Hiralal Ajodhya Prasad. Chiranji Lal got his introduction to firm Hiralal Ajodhya Prasad on the strength of the aforementioned letter and then he entered into certain transactions through the commission agency of this firm. According to the prosecution, Chiranji Lal purchased goods worth over fifteen thousand of rupees on credit. Chiranji Lal instructed the firm to despatch the goods by train and send the Railway receipt along with a Hundi for payment--a Hundi Was to be drawn on firm Ramji Lal and Ram Saroop, bazaz, Hindaun, in the district of Jaipur through some bank. After completing the aforementioned transaction Chiranji Lal entered into another transaction. He asked the complainant to advance him Rs. 1,050/- in cash as he had no money and he wanted money to make some purchases at Bareilly also. The complainant was first unwilling to part with money without there being any security. Chiranji Lal thereupon drew a Hundi in the sum of Rs. 2,000/dating it the 3rd of February. 1952, on his own firm and gave it to the complainant. Being assured by the Hundi, the complainant agreed to part with the money. Chiranji Lal did another thing at this stage, namely, he did not take the entire sum of Rs. 2,000/in cash from the complainant but took only Rs. 1,050/- in cash and said that the balance of Rs. 950/- may be appropriated by the complainant towards part payment of the goods which they were to despatch subsequently in respect of the earlier purchases made by Chiranji Lal. This was a very significant gesture of Chiranji Lal for apparently it had the effect of allaying any suspicions that the firm of Ajodhya Prasad may have had in regard to the bona fides of Chiranji lal. A sum of Rs. 1,050/- was handed over to Chiranji Lal in cash and in token of receipt of this money in cash Chiranji Lal was made to sign in the books of account of Ajodhya Prasads firm. Chiranji Lal thereafter left. The goods were despatched in accordance with the instructions given by Chiranji Lal by the complainants firm and a Hundi for the same was sent for acceptance through one Parmath Bank. The Hundi was presented through the bank on the 25th of February, 1952, and was returned dishonoured. Subsequently to this the complainant sent his Munim Nand kishore to the shop of Chiranji Lal but there was no fruitful result. Nand Kishore first Went to chiranji Lal and asked him about the dishonoured Hundi. Chiranji Lal sent him to Moti Lal and moti Lal in his turn sent him back to Chiranji Lal; neither was prepared to take any responsibility in regard to this payment. Therefore, Nand Kishore returned and made a report to his master, who t