MOHAMMAD ASLAM versus STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Citation: [1977] 1 S.C.R. 689 · Decided: 22-09-1976 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: P.N. BHAGWATI · Disposal: Appeal(s) allowed

Judgment (excerpt)

f 
\ 
I 
MOHAMMAD ASLAM 
v. 
STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH 
September 22, 1976 
[P. N. BHAGWATI, 
V. R. KRISHNA IYER AND 
S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, JJ.] 
' 
689 
Practice and Procedure-Re-appraisal of evidence by Supreme Court inspit~ 
of concurrent findings of fact, proper when miscarriage of justice has occurred. 
A 
B 
The appellant, a cashier in a rural block development office of Shahjahanpur 
district was convicted for misappropriating public money. Both the courts con· 
currently found that he bad pocketed the sum which he claimed to have paid the 
C 
Pancbayat-Secretary as salary. 
The appellant contended that the charge against him was falsified by the 
rnucher and regular entry of the cash register regarding the above payment, 
which bad been ticked ·and initialled by the Block Development Officer, and 
produced in evidence. 
Allowing the appeal, the Court 
HELO : ( 1) The proposition of litigative finality at the High Court level 
D 
on findings of fact has been affirmed by this Court, but the exceptions which 
prove the rule are also well-established. 
A conviction of guilt bas been ren· 
dered by both the Courts, but certain grave factors conducive to miscarriage 
of 3ustice, induce us to make' an exception. 
The accused is entitled to the 
benefit of reasonable doubt owing to the contemporaneous entry in the cash 
register coupled with the signature of the B.D.0. the same day, as against hi~ 
ipsi dixit later. [689 G, 691 H, 692 G-H] 
(2) Our observations must serve as catalysts to crash strategi~s on white 
E 
collar crimes. 
Gross negligence, even absent mens rea, in handling public 
funds by those in office must hold penal consequences as it inflicts double injury 
on the poor masses. [694 G-H] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 310 
of 1971. 
(Appeal by Special Leave from the Judgment and Order dated 
F 
23-4-1971 of the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Appeal No. 168/ 
69 with Criminal Appln. No. 986/69). 
Frank Anthony and U. P. Singh, for the Appellant. 
0. P. Rana, for the Respondent. 
G 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
KRISHNA IYER, J. 
Some exceptions disprove the rule. 
Cases ar1 
 
legion where the proverbial proposition of litigative finality 
at the 
High Court level on findings of fact has been affirmed by this Court, 
but the exceptions which prove the rule are also well-established. 
We must at the outset state that this case does not fit into the con-
ventional legal mould but, nevertheless, possesses such strange features 
that our 'ultimate' power may legitimately come into play. 
H 
A 
B 
c 
690 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1977] 1 S.C.R. 
A ~etty st?re;keeper-cum-cashier in a rural block development 
off?.~ (m the d1stnct of Shahjehanpur) was charged. with misappro-
pnation of ~eventl sums ~dding up to a little over Rs. 5,000/-. The 
charges havmg been derued and the real culprit having been pointed 
out .as the _boss of the block development office, the Sessions Court 
received evidence on both sides, found the testimony of the Block 
Devel?pmen~ _Officer (BOO, acronymically) 
'completely false and 
u~~elievable m ~egard to many of the items of embezzlement and made 
cntical o~servatlons about his culpability in respect of many of the 
malversations. 
We may havo something to say about the not un-
usual _phenomenon of th? _'small fry _getting caught, and t~e big shark 
breakmg through the net 111 econo!Illc offences where pubhc money is 
h~ndled by public servants. 
For the nonce we may content ourselve~ 
with the statement that the little official in his twenties-which the 
ac~~d was-was acquitted of all but one charge and the misappro-
pnat1on of Rs. ?,194.82 dwindled into a solitary fugitive item 
of 
Rs. 50/- for which he was punished with imprisonment for one year 
a fine of Rs. 300 /-. The conviction was confirmed but the sentence 
was reduced by the High Court. 
\ 
,,..._. 
)) 
The aggrieved appellant urges before us that the solitary surviving 
E 
F 
G 
H 
item of misappropriation held proved concurrently, had, in fact, been 
vitiated in the process by fundamental flaws. 
We will proceed briefly 
\ 
to narrate the episode and examine the tenability of the extraordinary 
features leading to the exculpatory sequel. 
The agrestic immensity of Indian backwardness is sought to be 
banished by developmental 
activities through block-level infra-
structures. 
Jaitipur Block is one such and it has a nucleus of small 
officials and some rural development assistants,

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.