This criminal appeal arises from the judgment of the learned Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, Lahore whereby, he on 4-5-1985 convicted Kafeel Ahmad under section 409, P.P.C. And sentenced him to three months' R.I. And a fine of Rs.2,000.
2. To prove its case, the prosecution examined ten witnesses Ghulam Mustafa, Booking Clerk P.W.6 stated that on 26-3-1981 he had issued bill Exh.P.A. For a sum of Rs.632/50 and gave it to the appellant. He further stated that it was the duty of the appellant to deposit the said amount at Lahore after his return from Sahiwal. Riaz Hussain Booking Clerk P.W.8 stated that or. 27-3-1981, he had issued vouchers P.W.8/A, to the appellant for a sum of Rs.84/75. He proved the signatures of the appellant on the vouchers. Zulqernain Sikandar P.W.3 stated that the appellant did not get audited TT2 Books or RPT Book from him. Abdur Rashid P.W.9 arrested the accused who got recovered Way Bills EXH.P.A/1, Exh.P.W. 8/A, Exh.P.W. 9/2 to 4, TT2 Bills Exh.P.W. 9/5, 6 and Ticket Books Exh.P.W.9/10. The rest of the evidence is more or less of formal nature.
3. When examined under section 342, Cr.P.C. The appellant admitted to have received Rs.852/25.
His plea was that he had given this amount to Saghir Ahmad, Cashier in the presence of Abdul Haque Siddiqi. Abdul Hameed and Jameel. Since Saghir Ahmad, did not care to deposit the amount, therefore, he took back the same from him, in the presence of Muhammad Aslam, Sultan Khan, Munir Ahmed and Nazir Ahmed and deposited the same on 26th or 27th of April, 1981. In defence, he produced Sultan Khan D.W.1 who stated that the appellant and given Rs.1,805 to Saghir Ahmad, Cashier for deposit in the Bank. Muhammad Jameel D.W.2 stated that it was in his presence that Saghir Ahmad, and appellant had quarrelled with each other because the Cashier had not deposited the cash given to him by the appellant. The appellant got back the cash from Saghir Ahmad and deposited it in the Bank. Abdul Haq Siddiqi D.W.3 stated that the appellant had given some money to Saghir Ahmad Cashier but he did not know the exact amount. Abdul Hameed D.W.4 stated that the appellant had asked Saghir Ahmad Cashier to deposit the amount on his behalf. Saghir Ahmed D.W.5 stated that he had accompanied, the appellant to the Cash Branch where he gave the cash to Saghir Ahmed Cashier for depositing the same.
4. The learned counsel for the petitioner mainly contended that since the appellant had deposited the amount, therefore, it was a case of temporary retention and as such the prosecution has failed to prove criminal misappropriation of the amount by the appellant. As against this, the learned counsel for the State has supported the judgment .Of the trial Court.
5. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties with care. I find that from the oral as well as documentary evidence stated above, it is proved that the appellant had committed breach of trust in respect of Rs.852/25. He admitted to have received the amount. Admittedly, the amount was not deposited by him on his return from Sahiwal to Lahore.
His plea that he had given the cash to Saghir Ahmad has not been satisfactorily proved in that, the statements of the D.Ws., suffer from infirmities such as material contradictions and discrepancies.
The defence evidence is not strong enough to rebut the prosecution case and its evidence. The commission of breach of trust is almost admitted by the appellant. It was his duty to deposit the cash on his return from Sahiwal to Lahore but he did not do so. He deposited the amount only after the registration of the case which is of no help to him. For all these reasons, I am convinced that the trial Court has rightly convicted him. The sentence awarded to him is not excessive.
6. For what has been said above, the appeal is dismissed. The sentence of imprisonment of three months shall, 'however, run concurrently with the sentence awarded to the appellant in case giving rise to the Criminal Appeal No. 348 of 1985.