a a IN TIH HIGH COURT OF SIKKIM Criminal Revision No.41 of2000 K,.B. Tiwari Son of S.B. Tiwari, ResidentofTemi, P.O. & P.S. Temi, South sikkim .... Petitioner. Versus State of sikkim. ... Respondent. Date of Decision: 12-3-2001. Coram: TheHon'bleM.JusticeRIpusudanDayal,Chief Justice. The Hon'ble M. Justice Anup Deb, Judge. Present: M. N. Rai, Advocateforthepetitioner. , M. S.P. Wangdi, Public Prosecutor with M. J.B. Pradhan, Govi. Advocate for the State. JUDGRENT Dayal, CJ. This criminal revision has been filed against the judgment dated 30-6- 2000 by the learned Sessions Judge (Special Division), Sikkim at Cingtok dismissing the appeal filed by the petitioner against the judgment and sentence passed by the leaned Chief Judicial Magistrate, East and North districts at Gangtok in criminal case fro.85 of 1999 convicting the petitioner K.B. Tiwari underSection409ofthehidianPenalCodeandsentencinghimtoundergosimple imprisonment of twelve months and to pay fine of ,Rs.2000/- and in default of payment of fine to undergo further simple imprisorment for three months. 2. After hearing M. N. Rai, leaned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S.P. Wangdi, leaned Public Prosecutor, we find no inflrmity in the judgment of conviction. M. N. RE however submits that having regard to the facts of the case, lenient view may be taken with respect to the sentence which the petitioner mayundergo.Materialfactsonthisaspectofthematterarethattheappellantwas at the relevant time working as Lower Division Clerk in Topakhani Sub- Division(Civil) of power Department. It is in the evidence of Mr. R.b. Bhutia, )1 `-i-ut 1 a a PW-6whowaspostedasAssistantEngineerinthePowerDepartmentthatitis thedrtyoftheAccountantandtheJun-orAccountanttoch.stributesalariesinthe Sub-Division.However,itisonliecordthatthepetitionerwasgivenmoneyby theAccountantOfTopakhiSub-Divisionfordistributiont`otheemployeesOf theSut)-DivisionandasumofRs.44,414.86wasgiventohimwithrespecttothe salaryofm.BishauidlBahunforthepedodfrom14-94to31-10-95which couldnotOepaldtohimsinceBishauLallBahonhadretiredw.e.f31-3-94.The petitioneroughttohaverefundedtheanrounttotheDepartmentbutthiswasnot done,untfl29-6-96whenhedepositedtheanount.Itisadisturbingfeatureofthe casethataLowerDivisionClerkwasaskedtodotheworkofAccountantand Jndor Accountant. It is also on record that even one nfasoq namely, Dilip PradhapPW-2azsousedtodistributethesalariesoftheemployees.Weareofthe viewthat,inthecircumstances,endsofjusticewillbemetifthepetitioneris sentencedtoimprisonmentalreadyundergonebyhimandalsotopayafineOf Rs.2,000/-andindefanltofpayinentoffinetoundergosimpleimprisonmentfor fifteendays'moreandweorderaccordingly.Thus,therevisionisallowedinpart. Weallowthepetitioneroneweek'stimetodepositthefinefalingwhichheshall beaITestedtosufferthesentenceawardedbyuswithrespecttotheinpn-sorment indefaultofpaymentoffine. Judge 12--3 -2001. t`QDxp:,r; Chief Justice !2--3-200].