1973 (11) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nviction and sentence of the appellant and of accused No. 2. That order having been confirmed by the High Court, Bombay, Nagpur Bench, accused No. 3 has brought this appeal by special leave. 2. The three accused were employees of the Chikhli Taluka Sahakari Shatki Kharedi Vikri Samiti Ltd., Chikhli. The Samiti has its head office at Chikhli and a branch office at Buldana. Accused No. 1 was working as an accounts clerk at the Buldana branch, accused No. 2 was an account clerk usually stationed at Chikhli while the appellant, being the Manager, used to lock after the work of both the head office and the branch office, the distance between the two being about 15 miles. 3. The Samiti used to receive large amounts in its Buldana branch off....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ct evidence of entrustment but we see none. All that the prosecution did was to produce the books of account of the Chikhli head office and of the Buldana branch. There is a debit entry in the books of the Buldana branch showing that a sum of Rs. 7.000/- was given to the appellant on November 10, 1965 for being taken to the head office but the mere entry, unsupported by any oral evidence cannot prove entrustment. Section 34 of the Evidence Act says that entries in books of account, regularly kept in the course of business are relevant but such statements shall not alone be sufficient evidence to charge any person with liability. The prosecution did not examine anyone even to show that the books of account were regularly kept in the course o....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....dits and debits are made," Absence of evidence on a material and important aspect renders it unsafe to hold that the charge of breach of trust is brought home to the appellant. 8. The High Court has placed preponderating reliance on the circumstance that the appellant has made his signature below the transactions of the day on which a debit entry in the sum of Rs. 9,500/- was made in the books of the branch office showing that the amount was handed over to him for being taken to the head office. In all probability the High Court took a clue from the statement made by the appellant under Section 342 of the CrPC admitting the particular signature to be his. It must not, however; be over looked that the admission made by the appellant must ....