Dismissed¶31

M/S.Larambha Service v. Suresh Ch.Churia

Orissa HC18 Jul 2025CRA/371/1992

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Orissa High Court, Cuttack; CRA No. 371 of 1992; S.S. Mishra, J.; decided 18.07.2025; appeal under Section 374(2) CrPC against acquittal; Section 408 IPC; misappropriation of fertilizers by cooperative society employee; 13.484 qntl.; M/s Larambha Service Cooperative Society Ltd.; Suresh Chandra Churia; JMFC Bargarh conviction 08.08.1989; Criminal Appeal No.113/39 of 1989; acquittal dated 10.04.1991; no perversity in appellate findings; belated challenge to 1992 acquittal; complainant untraceable; IIC Atabira Police Station report 09.07.2025; CRA dismissed.

What did the court decide?

None; the appeal against acquittal was dismissed. ¶31

M/S.Larambha Service Vs Suresh Ch.Churia — Orissa HC (2025) — LawSathi Research

¶1

THE HIGH COURT OF ORISSA AT CUTTACK

¶2

CRA No. 371 of 1992

¶3

(In the matter of an application under Section 374(2) of Criminal Procedure Code)

¶4

M/s Larambha Service ……. Appellant Cooperative Society Ltd. -VersusSuresh Chandra Churia ……. Respondent

¶5

For the Appellant : M/s. S.C. Mohanty & Associates, Advocates.

¶6

For the Respondent : Mr. H.S. Mishra, Advocate

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

THE HONOURABLE SHRI JUSTICE SIBO SANKAR MISHRA

¶9

Date of Hearing: 10.07.2025 : Date of Judgment: 18.07.2025

¶10

S.S. Mishra, J. The present appeal is directed against the judgment

¶11

and order dated 10.04.1991 passed by the learned Additional Sessions

¶12

Judge, Bargarh in Criminal Appeal No.113/39 of 1989, whereby the

¶13

judgment of conviction and order of sentence awarded by the learned

¶14

JMFC, Bargarh vide judgment and order dated 08.08.1989 in ICC Case No. 31 of 1987 corresponding to T.R. No. 826 of 1987 in favour of the respondent has been set aside by the appellate court. The informant has filed the present appeal.

¶15

This is a matter whereby the appellant had initiated a complaint case being ICC Case No. 31 of 1987 corresponding to T.R. No. 826 of 1987 against the respondent on the alleged commission of offence punishable under Section 408 of IPC. The learned JMFC, Bargarh by its judgment dated 08.08.1989 convicted the respondent under Section 408 IPC for misappropriation of 13.484 qntl. of fertilizers of M/s Larambha Service Cooperative Society from 01.07.1985 to 11.11.1985 and sentenced the respondent to undergo S.I. for one year and to pay a fine of Rs.2000/-, in default to undergo S.I. for four months.

¶16

The respondent preferred an appeal before the learned Sessions Judge, Sambalpur against the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned JMFC, Bargarh. The appellate court vide its judgment dated 10.04.1991 allowed the Criminal Appeal No.113/39

¶17

Page 2 of 5

¶18

of 1989 and set aside the judgment of conviction and order of sentence passed by the learned JMFC, Bargarh by recording an acquittal in favour

¶19

of the respondent. The appellate court after thorough analysis of the evidence arrived at the following conclusion:-

¶20

“5. None of the witnesses namely P.Ws. 1 and 3 could give the mode of receipt of stock by the accused, the mode of preparation of accounts and the manner of taking and issuing the stock and procedure of maintenance of account of the society. In para 31 of PW.1’s cross examination it is revealed that the ledger stock of fertilizer under Ext.26 relates to the stock of previous year. The certificate dt.30.07.85 did not bear the signature of the accused. The stock received under delivery of chalan as per the entry Ext.30 in the stock register relates to Kumelsingha godown and it was under the custody of Suresh Pradhan. The lifting certificate No.698 dt.30.7.85 did not bear signature of the accused. So it is not known by whom 110 quintals of fertilizer were received. Ext.16 to 20 contain the transaction of relevant period and the period subsequent thereto. No receipt has been issued relating to the transaction under Ext.10. The Auditor has issued half margin memo as per Ext.6 for explanation and compliance by the accused. It is seen from Ext.C that the shortage of stock reflected therein related to the opening balance of the year 1985-86. That means the shortage related to the previous year and not to the year under review. The accused has been specifically charged for misappropriation during 1.7.85 to 11.11.85 i.e., a

¶21

Page 3 of 5

¶22

period of four months only. Accounts in the society have been maintained taking the shortage of fertilizer stock of previous year to the period in question. So at what point of time the entrustment was made and the misappropriation was perpetrated there is absolutely no evidence.

¶23

The order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class is set aside. Fine if paid be returned.”

¶24

The appellant Society through its Secretary Bitan Kumar Biswas

¶25

has preferred this appeal against the acquittal order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Sambapur. This appeal is pending since 1992. The complainant in the present case is not traceable and none has entered appearance for the appellant. Moreover, pursuant to the order dated 01.07.2025, the IIC, Atabira Police Station has submitted a report dated 09.07.2025, inter alia, stating that on inquiry from the locality the whereabout of the appellant, namely Bitan Kumar Biswas could not be ascertained as the local people has no knowledge about the appellant, but

¶26

it is ascertained Bitan Kumar Biswas, who was the Secretary of M/s Larambha Service Cooperative Society, had retired in the year 1992 and

¶27

Page 4 of 5

¶28

after that he was shifted to Kolkata, however, nobody has any knowledge regarding his address.

¶29

In the aforementioned background, this Court is not inclined to adjourn the matter anymore, rather prefer to dispose of the same. This being a case, wherein the acquittal of the respondent was way back in the year 1992 has been challenged. I am not inclined to interfere with the impugned judgement at this belated stage

¶30

I do not find any perversity in the findings recorded by the appellate court. Therefore, I am not inclined to interfere with the acquittal order.

¶31

7. Accordingly, the CRA stands dismissed.

¶32

The High Court of Orissa, Cuttack Dated the 18^th July, 2025/Ashok

¶33

Signature Not Verified

¶34

Digitally Signed Signed by: ASHOK KUMAR JAGADEB MOHAPATRA Designation: Secretary Reason: Authentication Location: High Court of Orissa Date: 18-Jul-2025 18:33:20

¶35

Page 5 of 5

M/S.Larambha Service v. Suresh Ch.Churia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

M/S.Larambha Service v. Suresh Ch.Churia

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Ananda Samal Vs State

Gangadhar Nayak Vs State

Smt.Premashila Vs State

M/S.Ghanashyam Vs State

Suresh Kumar Behera Vs State

Purusottam Behera Vs State