1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JAIPUR BENCH, JAIPUR JUDGMENT BADRILAL VS. STATE OF RAJASTHAN. SB Criminal Revision Pet. No. 781 OF 1999 under Section 397 read with section 401 Cr.P.C. against the order dated July 16, 1999 of Special Judge, (Communal Riots Cases) and Addl. Sessions Judge Tonk in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of1997 whereby he partly allowed the appeal of accused petitioner and confirmed the conviction of the accused petitioner for offence under sections 409 IPC and released him on the judicial custody of 17 days already by petitioner and enhanced the fine to the extent of Rs. 7000/- in the event of non payment of fine the accused petitioner was ordered to further undergo3 months SI and against the judgment and order dated September 27,1994 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Niwai Tonk in criminal case No. 451 of 1993 whereby he convicted the accused petitioner for offence under section 409 IPC and sentenced him to one year simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default of payment of fine he was ordered to further undergo 6 months additional imprisonment. Date of Order : April 9, 2009 PRESENT HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH CHANDRA SHARMA Mr. Babulal, for the petitioner. Mr. Pradeep Shrimal, Public Prosecutor. BY THE COURT : This revision petition has been filed by Badrilal, accused petitioner 2 against the order dated July 16, 1999 of Special Judge, (Communal Riots Cases) and Addl. Sessions Judge Tonk in Cr. Appeal No. 23 of 1997 whereby he partly allowed the appeal of accused petitioner and confirmed the conviction of the accused petitioner for offence under sections 409 IPC and released him on the judicial custody of 17 days already by petitioner and enhanced the fine to the extent of Rs. 7000/- in the event of non payment of fine the accused petitioner was ordered to further undergo 3 months SI and against the judgment and order dated September 27,1994 of Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate Niwai Tonk in criminal case No. 451 of 1993 whereby he convicted the accused petitioner for offence under section 409 IPC and sentenced him to one year simple imprisonment with a fine of Rs. 2,000 in default of payment of fine he was ordered to further undergo 6 months additional imprisonment. 2. The learned counsel for the petitioner brought to the notice of this court that the petitioner Badrilal died on September 7, 2006 and the legal heirs of Badrilal filed application under 3 section 482 Cr.P.C. for impleading them as parties. This Court also under mistaken impression allowed the application and impleaded them as parties in place of Badrilal, in revision petition. Since Badrilal had already died this revision petition cannot servive now as become abated. 3. On merits also this revision petition is devoid of merit. I have gone through the judgment of the Special Judge wherein the conviction of the petitioner was confirmed for the offence under section 409 IPC and since he remained in custody for 17 days he was released for the period already undergone by him and fine of Rs. 7,000 was imposed and in the event of non- payment of fine accused petitioner Badrilal was ordered to further undergo 3 months SI. Even if the fine is not deposited by Badrilal, it was only Badrilal who was to be sent to judicial 4 custody for serving out the period of sentence in default. I am in agreement with the findings arrived at by the appellate court in the judgment dated July 16, 1999. Badrilal was posted as Patwari, Patwar Halka Rajwas and was transferred to Tehsil Malpura. Receipts book was not handed over to Patwari who was posted in place of him. The Patwari posted in place of him reported that Badri lal issued receipt for Rs. 518.35 and has not deposited the same in Government Tresury. On enquiry by the officials, it revealed that Badrilal issued receipts of Rs.518.35 but has not deposited amount in the Government Treasury and misused the Govt. money. The prosecution in support of its case produced 20 witnesses. The trial court found that Badrilal Patwari recovered Rs. 2499.34 paise from the Farmers and have not deposited the same in the Govt. Treasury. From the statements of the prosecution witnesses it was proved that 5 Badrilal misappropriated the amount and has not deposited the money after recovering from the farmers in Govt. Treasury. The learned counsel for the legal heirs of Badri lal produced a certified copy of the appellate order of Board of Revenue dated March 15, 1985 for the charge sheet issued against him. The criminal proceedings and the administrative proceedings both are different from each other. 4. For the reasons mentioned above this revision petition is dismissed as abated as Badrilal died in the year 1996. Since there is no force in the arguments of the learned cousnel and the order passed by the appellate court is just and proper, this revision petition is dismissed on merits also. As the main petition has been dismissed the stay application also stands dismissed. (Mahesh Chandra Sharma) J. OPPareek/