! /^"~V »0—»»" it. av 578f33 GR.P^ sseKSBSi -yrw. i s CR»e*e^ te (&' HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH ATBU-ASPUR (Hon. IVIr. Justice Pritinker Diwaker) CRIIVIINAL APPEAL No. 1469 of 1997 APPELLANT State of Madhya Pradesh VERSUS RESPONDENT Bhagwan Singh —.(t Shri Akhil Mishra for the State/appellant. None for the respondent/accused. CRIIVIINAL APPEAL UNDER SECTION 37811) OF THE CODE OF CRIIVIINAL PROCEDURE. JUDGMENT (5,5.2010) The present appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 15.2.1996 passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Durg in Criminal Case No. 6188/1994, acquitting the respondenVaccused of the offence under Sections 420 of the Indian Penal Code. 2. The facts of the case in brief are that at the relevant time respondent/accused was working as peon in Nagrik Sahkari Bank, Bhilai and on 25.8.1994 one account was opened by him in the name of one Gopal and an amount of Rs. 40,000 was withdrawn from the said account. It is alleged that this amount of Rs. 40,000 was not in the account but the respondent/accused withdrew the same. On the basis of written complaint lodged by the Manager of the said Bank on 26.8.1994 Ex. P-1, FIR Ex. P-5 was registered against the respondenVaccused. 3. In support of its case, prosecution has examined six witnesses. Statement of the accused/respondent was also recorded under section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in which he denied the charges levelled against him and pleaded his innocence and false implication in the case. 4. By the impugned judgment, the trial Court .has acquitted the respondent/accused for the offence as mentioned above. Hence the present appeal. i(UK ,^|S"' 5. Counsel for the appellant/State submits that on the basis of material collected by the prosecution, the Court below ought to have convicted the respondent/accused for the offence under section 420 IPC but ignoring the same it has awarded acquittal to the respondent and has fallen in a grave legal error. He submits that the findings of the Court below in acquitting the respondent/accused are perverse. 6. Heard counsel for the parties and perused the material available on record including thejudgment impugned. 7. From the material collected by the prosecution it is not clear that it is the respondenVaccused who had withdrawn an amount of Rs. 40,000 from the account opened in the name of one Gopal. Evidence further reveals that the amount of Rs. 40,000 was deposited by someone else in the said account and thus no pecuniary loss has been caused to anyone. Evidence on record does not reflect that anyone has been cheated by the respondent/accused. Thus the view taken by the Court below in acquitting the respondent/accused appears to be well founded and no interference therewith is warranted. 8. Thus after going through the material available on record and being very much conscious of the existing legal position that in an appeal against acquittal if two views are possible on the basis of evidence led by the prosecution and the trial Court taking one view favoured the accused, this Court is of the considered opinion that reversion of the findings of acquittal by the appellate Court taking the other possible view into consideration, is not permissible in law and therefore the judgment impugned acquitting the respondent /accused ofthe offence under Section 420 ofthe indian Penal Code, is just and proper and does not warrant any interference by this Court. Accordingly, the appeal being without substance is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. - - -— - -^