news details |
|
|
| Teacher involved in fraudulent withdrawal | | Court acquitted in one of the case after 26 years investigation and Trial | |
Jammu, September, 22:- Second Additional Sessions Judge Jammu Mr. Ashok Kumar Koul today acquitted Bodh Raj the then teacher Govt High School Gole Gujral after 26 years in one of the seven cases registered against him u/s 420/467/471 RPC.
According to the prosecution case on December 17, 1980 Headmaster Govt High School Gole Gujral Jammu lodged a written complaint with P/S Domana in which it has been submitted that a letter dated October 15, 1980 addressed to Headmaster written by one senior master S N Dhar disclosing that as per the record of Accountant General an amount of Rs 3000/- was withdrawn by the headmaster during 1978 and was debited to his account. After verification of the school records it was found that no such drawl was made by the school. Accordingly a certificate was made by the school authorities, which was given to Mr. SN Dhar. Sometime after communication was received from AG dated November 14, 1980 to the effect that an amount of Rs 5500 as been withdrawn from Jammu Treasury by headmaster of the said school. The headmaster on the advice of senior accountant lodged an FIR, the police during the investigation it was found that the accused prepared 25 fraudulent bills during 1978 to 1980 and withdrawn an amount of Rs 67,950/- from the treasury and misappropriated the same. In the meantime investigation was handed over to Crime Branch Jammu. The CBJ during the investigation split the cases into seven cases. Charges were not only split but different cases were even registered against the accused and the present case is one of the 7 cases.
Second Additional Sessions Judge Jammu Mr. AK Koul after hearing APP appearing for the State and Advocate Rupak Ratta appearing for the accused observed that so far as the forgery part of the case is concerned same has to be ruled out because we do not have any cogent evidence on record to establish the crime. Another limb of the charge is whether accused received the amount from the treasury and misappropriated it. Some treasury/ bank officials saying that accused would usually present the bills in the treasury may not suffice because it was his duty to do so. Did he present the bill in questions, before treasury and received the amount is the moot point. The signatures of accused on bills as a token of receipt of money could be proved by experts/ non-expert or through comparison by Court, but none of three cases can operates and the reasons have been spelt out in detail. So evidence on record is totally deficient to fasten the liability of the crime on the accused.
In the 21 pages judgment Mr. AK Koul further observed that the Court is of the opinion that the entire exercise conducted by the prosecution has ended in futility. The evidence which could genuinely link the accused with the crime is missing. Some more evidence was indispensably required but prosecution has not been able to adduce such evidence. Whatever, the evidence oral or documentary on record, miserably failed short of proving the crime attributed to accused. The only option so is to dismiss this case, which is so dismissed and accused is acquitted from the charges. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
