IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.205 of 2002 SURYA NARAYAN DAS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 6 12.8.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. In the case, misappropriation is alleged against three persons for the amount allotted in favour of the executing agent Kail Paswan which was based on an enquiry conducted by the S.D.O. It was simply a confession of the executing agent Kail Paswan that cheques were issued in his favour in three instalments. But, actually it was Pramukh and Mukhia who were executing the work. Irregularity, if any, was found on their act and that was the misappropriation. In all, two witnesses are examined in the case. P.W.1` is Surya Narayan Das,SDO, Tekari and P.W.2 is Kail Paswan, the executing agent. Their statements were found sufficient of conviction by the trial court that has been set aside by the learned Sessions Judge in the capacity of First Appellate court. Setting aside of the conviction is based on statements of both the prosecution witnesses. The statement of P.W.1 in Paragraph-9 is to the effect that Kail Paswan had told him that he himself had withdrawn the money and used the same without the interference of any of the accused persons. Evidence of P.W.2 in Para-3 is that cheque was withdrawn by him. There was no interference in executing the work on 2 behalf of any of the accused persons. So, I find no mistake committed by the learned Sessions Judge in reverting the judgment of the trial court. Otherwise also, only some irregularity was found in course of enquiry and that also not based on any document. Total amount allotted for the scheme was Rs.44,400/-. Only Rs.26,325/- was handed over to the executing agent in three instalments. The completion of the work can not be imagined. Thus, I find the conclusion by the Appellate court on sufficient material needs no interference. This revision is accordingly, dismissed. SKBOSE (Mandhata Singh)