Partly allowed

G.Sarveswara Rao v. the State of A.P.

Andhra Pradesh HC18 Feb 2020CRLRC/1394/2007

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The High Court allowed the criminal revision filed under sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. The court confirmed the conviction for falsification of accounts (sections 477-A and 471 read with 467 IPC) but reduced the sentence of simple imprisonment from six months to one month under each count, confirming the fine imposed by lower courts.

What did the court decide?

Conviction confirmed for offences under sections 477-A and 471 read with 467 IPC; sentence reduced from six months to one month; fine confirmed.

G.Sarveswara Rao Vs the State of A.P. — Corruption | Andhra Pradesh HC (2020)

¶1

HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.PRAVEEN KUMAR

¶2

Crl.R.C. No. 1391 of 2007

¶3

O R D E R:-

¶4

Heard the learned counsel for both the parties and perused the record.

¶5

The present Criminal Revision Case is filed under Sections 397 and 401 Cr.P.C. assailing the conviction and sentence imposed by the lower appellate Court in Crl.A.No. 138 of 2001 on the file of the Court of IV Additional Sessions Judge (Fast Track Court), Nellore, vide judgment dated 08.10.2007 modifying the sentence imposed by the trail Court in C.C. No. 581 of 1992, dated 26.07.2001 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore.

¶6

Originally, the sole accused was tried for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 477-A and 471 IPC. The trial Court found the accused guilty of the offence punishable under Section 409 IPC and convicted and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to undergo simple imprisonment for one month. He was also convicted for the offence punishable under Sections 477-A and 471 IPC and sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for one year under each count. The sentences were directed to run concurrently. On appeal, the lower appellate Court, partly allowed the appeal, setting aside the conviction and sentence imposed for the offence

¶7

CPK,J CrlRC_1391_2007

¶8

¶9

punishable under Section 409 IPC while confirming the conviction for the offence punishable under Section 477-A IPC. However, modified the sentence by reducing it to simple imprisonment to six months. The conviction for the offence under Section 471 read with 467 IPC is confirmed but the sentence of simple imprisonment is reduced to six months confirming the fine of Rs.500/-, in default, to suffer simple imprisonment for one month.

¶10

The facts in issue are that the accused, who was working as a Senior Assistant, was appointed as an acting Accountant of the Divisional Forest Office, Nellore. The Accounts Officer of Conservator of Forest, Guntur conducted Audit for April, 1988 for the Accounts of Nellore Division and sent a review to Divisional Forest Officer for compliance. On 23.05.1988, the Superintendent, Divisional Forest Officer, while taking the assistance of K.Ranga Rao, checked the cash book, as the accused was not available on that day, and noted that the arrears pay bill of P. Chinna Subbaiah, Forest Guard of Venkatagiri Range was once again charged in the Accounts for Rs.3,903.60 which was already paid to the concerned at Venkatagiri Range Office. When the same was questioned, the accused is said to have stated that it happened by oversight and remitted the amount in the treasury vide Challan No. 5748, dated 26.05.1988. The Divisional Forest Officer instructed the Superintendent to check the cash book thoroughly and point out lapses if any.

¶11

3 CPK,J

¶12

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶13

It is stated that the accused evaded to handover the cash book and other records. Later, the Accounts Officer of Conservator of Forests conducted detailed enquiry on 21.09.1988, which revealed that the accused misappropriated huge amounts because of which the Divisional Forest Officer suspended him and lodged a report for misappropriation of Rs.40,855.25 for the period from 05.09.1987 to 04.09.1988. The police, after investigation filed a charge sheet which was taken on file as C.C.No.581 of 1992 on the file of the Court of II Additional Judicial Magistrate of First Class, Nellore.

¶14

On appearance, copies of documents as required under Section 207 Cr.P.C., came to be furnished, and thereafter, the accused was examined under Section 239 Cr.P.C., but he denied the offence.

¶15

On appearance of the accused, charge under Sections 409, 477-A and 471 IPC came to be framed, read over and explained to him in Telugu, to which, he pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried.

¶16

In support of its case, the prosecution examined PWs.1 to 16 and got marked Exs.P1 to P75. After completion of prosecution evidence, the accused was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing against him in the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, to which he denied, but however, he did not adduce any oral evidence.

¶17

4 CPK,J

¶18

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶19

Relying upon the evidence of the prosecution witnesses coupled with the documentary evidence, the trial Court convicted and sentenced the accused, which was confirmed by the lower appellate Court by modifying the sentence as referred to above.

¶20

With regard to the charges under Sections 477-A and 471 IPC that were framed against the accused, it is the case of the prosecution that the accused committed the offence of falsification of the accounts i.e. cash book, Travelling Allowance Register, Acquittance Register, Fund Application Register and Vouchers of the staff members of the Divisional Forest Office, Nellore and also the staff members of the Range Offices within the jurisdiction of Divisional Forest Office, Nellore. The accused did not deny about his maintaining and controlling records, such as Cash book, etc. PW4, Typist of Divisional Forest Office, Nellore stated that he can identify the hand-writing of the accused and he also stated that all the entries in the Cash book under Exs.P5, P21, P73 were written by the accused. PW6, B. Kesevulu, the then Attender in Forest Department, Nellore, in his evidence deposed that he did not receive the T.A. amount of Rs.246.35 during the month of August, 1986 as mentioned in the cash book at page 165 in Volume No.3 and he also deposed that he did not receive the T.A. amount of Rs.350/- covered under the Voucher No.39/7-88 under Ex.P71 and he also deposed that he did not receive Tour advance in the month of July, 1988.

¶21

5 CPK,J

¶22

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶23

PW7 – Syed Ahmed Abdul, the then forest Guard in Forest Department deposed that he never worked in the office of the Divisional Forest Office, Nellore during the year 1985-86. He also deposed that he never received festival advance at Divisional Forest Office in the month of May, 1985. Since he did not speak regarding the period covered in his case i.e. September, 1987 to September, 1988, his evidence is of no use to the prosecution. PW8, M.Sanjeeva Rao, the then Forest Range Officer worked at Atmakur and Naidupeta deposed that an amount of Rs.981-80 was not paid to him on 31.08.1987 at Divisional Forest Office, Nellore. But he received the said amount towards T.A. bill of 6/86 at Forest Range Office, Atmakur. He also deposed that an amount of Rs.1,418/- was not paid to him towards T.A. of July, 1987 at Divisional Forest Office or at anywhere and the signature shown to him in Acquittance Register Ex.P7 at page No.15 for Bill No. 101/87-88 is not that of him. Pw9 – P. Siva Reddy, the then Forest Range Officer, Social Forest Division, Atmakur, in his evidence deposed regarding the entries in the cash book of the year 1986. Therefore, his evidence is of no use to the prosecution. PW10 – T.China Subbaiah, the then Forest Guard at Venkatagiri Range deposed that he never received Rs.370.15 towards Adhoc salary at Divisional Forest Office, Nellore on 28.06.1986. But he received the said Adhoc Leave salary at Range Office in Venkatagiri. He also deposed that he never received leave salary of Rs.3,891-60 at

¶24

6 CPK,J

¶25

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶26

Divisional Forest Office, Nellore on 21.04.1988. But he received the leave salary at Range Office in Venkatagiri and he also deposed that he never repaid the leave salary drawn by him by way of challan on the ground that he has drawn twice. He also deposed that he did not receive Festival Advance of Rs.500/- on 31.08.1985 and he also did not receive Educational Advance of Rs.500/- at Divisional Forest Office, Nellore on 30.06.1988. PW11 – B. Venkataiah, the then Junior Assistant at Divisional Forest Office, Nellore deposed that the signatures shown to him at Page No.14 in the T.A. Acquittance Register marked as Ex.P6 in C.C.No. 582 of 1982 was not that of him as in Exs.P73 and P74. PW12 – P.Srinivasa Rao, the then Plantation Manager at A.P.F.D.C., Nellore deposed that he did not receive Rs.1,044-10 towards T.A. for August, 1987 and he also did not receive an amount of Rs.028/- towards T.A. for the month of September, 1987. PW13 – K.Subba Rao, the then Attender Divisional Forest Office, Nellore deposed that he never received a sum of Rs.100/- towards T.A. Advance on 26.07.1988. The signatures shown to him in loose voucher bearing No.38/7-88 under Ex.P75 was not that of him. In spite of crossexamination of PWs.6 to 8 and PWs.10 to 13, the accused could not elicit a single point to shake their evidence.

¶27

Further, the accused when he was examined under Section 313 Cr.P.C. admitted about his maintaining and controlling the cash book and the evidence of PWs.6 to 8 and

¶28

7 CPK,J

¶29

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶30

10 to 13 coupled with the report of hand-writing expert who was examined as PW14 from F.S.L., Hyderabad clearly establishes that the signature on the vouchers and in the Acquittance Register were forged. Therefore, the evidence of PWs. 6 to 8 and 10 to 13 coupled with the evidence of PWs.1 and 2, clearly establish that the accused falsified the accounts books such as Cash Book, Acquittance Register, Travelling Allowance Register and Vouchers while acting as the Accountant of Divisional Forest Office, Nellore.

¶31

At this juncture, the learned counsel for the petitioner – accused submits that since the charge was framed under Section 409 IPC, the petitioner must have been arrested and kept in jail for a considerable time. He further pleads that he is not in touch with the client and not aware as to whether the petitioner is alive or not. However, he submits that the accused must be 84 years of age as on today since the record shows that he was 71 years in the year 2007. Hence pleads for reduction of sentence, but the same is opposed by the learned Public Prosecutor.

¶32

Having regard to the above, this Court, while confirming the conviction imposed on the accused for the offences punishable under Sections 477-A and 471 read with 467 IPC, the sentence of imprisonment is reduced from six months to one month under each count confirming the fine imposed by the Courts below. The substantive sentences were directed to

¶33

8 CPK,J

¶34

CrlRC_1391_2007

¶35

run concurrently and the sentence undergone by the

¶36

petitioner shall be given set off.

¶37

Accordingly, the Criminal Revision Case is partly allowed.

¶38

As a sequel, Miscellaneous Petitions, if any pending, shall stand disposed of as infructuous.

¶39

________________________ C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J

¶40

18.02.2020

¶41

bcj

G.Sarveswara Rao v. the State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

G.Sarveswara Rao v. the State of A.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Vallam Muni Prabhakar and Another, Vs the Stte of a.P., Rpe by Its Pubic Prosecutor

S. Doraswamy, Vs the State of Ap Rep by Its Pp Hyd.

Reliance General Insurance Company Limited Vs Meesala Kalavathi

Mr. P.Raghunadh, Vs State of a.P., Rep by P., and Another

Kantamneni Koteswara Rao, Vs The State of A.P.

G.Sarveswara Rao, Vs the State of a.P., Rep by Pp.