Bombay High Court Pulls Up Trial Judge For Overlooking Absence Of Crucial Evidence, Urges Judicial Academy To Address Such Issues During Training
The Bombay High Court recently pulled up the trial court for convicting a Postmaster for misappropriation overlooking the absence of documentary evidence of registers and journals of the Post Office crucial to verify the misappropriation.Justice SM Modak, while setting aside the conviction, criticized the lackadaisical approach of both the prosecution and the judiciary and emphasized...
The Bombay High Court recently pulled up the trial court for convicting a Postmaster for misappropriation overlooking the absence of documentary evidence of registers and journals of the Post Office crucial to verify the misappropriation.
Justice SM Modak, while setting aside the conviction, criticized the lackadaisical approach of both the prosecution and the judiciary and emphasized the importance of seizing and producing relevant documentary evidence during trial.
“Neither APP in-charge nor the trial Court Judge were vigilant in taking appropriate steps/directions. They conducted trial without registers. Trial Court discussed evidence and convicted the applicant by overlooking absence of important piece of evidence. It is strange even the Appellate Court overlooked this fact and confirmed the conviction. This is blatant disregard to the responsibility bestowed on the stakeholders.”
The court decided to bring this to the notice of the Maharashtra Judicial Academy (MJA) to address this issue, as it imparts training to judges.
“I deem it necessary to bring this lackadaisical approach of Police and Judges to the Joint Director, MJA. Because training is imparted to Judges. He can bring this fact to the notice of trial Court and Appellate Court Judges trained there. It is expected from Joint Director, MJA to inform this Court in what manner these observations were given effect. Copy of this judgment may be sent to him.”
The court allowed a revision application by the convicted Postmaster of Khambewadi Post, who was tasked with handling deposits and maintaining records. It was alleged that between August 20, 2006, and February 28, 2007, the accused misappropriated Rs. 28,834.
Assistant Superintendent from the Post Office at Panvel after inspecting the documents alleged that the amount deposited by relevant customers was not deposited in the account of the postal department. He found that registers were not maintained for the entire period and that is why he came to the conclusion that the money was misappropriated for that period. He also allegedly verified this fact from the account holders.
Following the inspection, a complaint was filed with the Vavoshi Police outpost, leading to the registration of an FIR under Sections 409 and 468 of the IPC.
Judicial Magistrate First Class, Khalapur convicted the accused under Section 409 of the IPC while acquitting them of the charge under Section 468. The Additional Sessions Judge, Panvel dismissed the petitioner's appeal and upheld the conviction. Thus, he filed the present revision application before the high court.
During the trial, the prosecution examined seven witnesses, including account holders and investigating officers.
The documentary evidence consisted of documents seized during the investigation, including registers, passbooks, and daily account letters. However, the relevant registers pertaining to the period mentioned in the FIR were not seized, and those that were seized were not produced in court and shown to the witnesses, the HC noted.
“Even one may say that the learned trial Judge has adopted lackadaisical approach in not issuing necessary directions for producing at least the registers seized as per the seizure panchanama”, said the court.
Despite the lack of crucial documentary evidence, the trial court convicted the accused for the offense under Section 409 of the IPC, which deals with criminal breach of trust by a public servant.
Even the appellate court overlooked the prosecution's failure to produce the relevant registers and the fact that the seized registers did not pertain to the period mentioned in the FIR, the HC observed.
The failure to seize and produce relevant registers and journals in court led to a lacuna in the prosecution's evidence, as the oral testimony of witnesses could not be substantiated by documentary evidence, the HC said.
The court emphasized the importance of documentary evidence in proving charges of misappropriation. Noting the absence of relevant registers and journals, the court highlighted the failure of both the prosecution and the lower courts to adequately address this critical issue. The court pointed out that without inspecting these documents, the complainant could not conclude misappropriation. However, the seized registers were not tendered as evidence, creating a serious lacuna, the court observed.
Ultimately, the HC set aside the conviction and ordered the petitioner's release.
Case Title: Anand Narayan Sakpal vs State of Maharashtra
Case No - Criminal Revision Application (St) No.4181 Of 2024