Srinagar, Oct 21: The High Court of J&K and Ladakh on Saturday upheld conviction of a former cashier of Kamraz Rural Bank (now J&K Grameen Bank) Baramulla regarding “misappropriation” of Rs 21000 by him during 2007-2008.
The cashier, presently about 70-year-old, had been convicted by the Court of Special Judge Anti-Corruption (CBI) Cases Srinagar on 29 September 2018 for commission of offences under Section under Section 420, 409 RPC and 5(2) read with 5(1) (c) &(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, Samvat, 2006 and sentenced to simple imprisonment of two years for each offence and a consolidated fine of Rs. 10,000.
“The trial court has examined in detail the evidence led by the prosecution which has been appreciated by this Court as well and this Court too has come to the same conclusion as the one arrived at by the learned trial court except in respect of conviction of the appellant for the commission of offence under section 420 RPC,” a bench of Rajnesh Oswal said, adding, “The appellant (cashier) has not been able to satisfy this Court that there has been any wrong appreciation of evidence by the learned trial court.”
In fact, the court said, on the basis of the evidence led by the parties, the only conclusion that can be arrived at is that the cashier is guilty of commission of offences punishable Section 409 RPC and 5(2) read with 5(1) (c) & (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
“Therefore, this Court does not find any infirmity in the judgment of conviction recorded by the learned trial court except to the extent of conviction under section 420 RPC,” the court said and accordingly acquitted him of the charge for commission of offence under section 420 RPC but maintained the conviction under sections 409 RPC and 5(2) read with 5(1) (c) Page 22 of 23 &(d) of the J&K Prevention of Corruption Act, Samvat, 2006.
Also, the court modified the sentence, reducing it from 2 years to one year, as it considered the age of the cashier.
“Taking into consideration that the appellant is 70 years old, the sentence awarded to him on each count is reduced from two years to one year on both counts,” the court said, adding, “The sentences shall run concurrently and the period for which the appellant has already remained in custody shall be set off against the period of imprisonment of one year.”
