Skip to content
How to use Judgment tools
  1. Click Tools to open PDF, Print, Tag, Note, Favourite, and CiteSignal.
  2. Use Brief & Ask in the toolbar for the AI Brief and case chat.
  3. Jump to sections with the pills below the help bar.

State Vs. Omparkash Mann

State vs Omparkash Mann

Disposition Application dismissed Court Delhi Decided Jul 12, 2005
~2 min read
https://sooperkanoon.com/case/703557

For advocates & juniors · 7-day free trial

Brief this judgment before chambers

Stop skimming 50 pages - get an 18-section AI Brief on this case, ask scoped follow-ups, and find related precedents with Semantic Search. Full trial, no card required.

  • 18-section brief - facts, issues, ratio, relief
  • Ask this case - answers cite the judgment
  • Semantic search - find precedents by meaning
  • Research drawer - sections, cites, related cases

No card required · credentials emailed · Log in if you already have an account

Citation
Court
Delhi High Court
Judge
Decided On
Case Number
Criminal Misc. A. No. 4080/2005 in Crl.L.P. No. 67 of 2005
Subject
Criminal
Disposition
Application dismissed

Case Summary

AI-generated summary - not the official court judgment text.

- - ORDER 1. Learned Counsel for the State has attempted with great perseverance to submit that the respondent/accused has failed to produce the records and, hence, the prosecution was fully justified in drawing adverse inferences regarding shortfalls in stocks leading ultimately to his conviction under Section 40...

Key legal issue
Criminal
Outcome / disposition
Application dismissed
Acts & sections
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 409

Parties & Advocates

Appellant / Petitioner

State

Advocate Akshay Bipin, Adv

Respondent

Omparkash Mann

Advocate Ravinder Chadha, APP

Legal References

Acts
Indian Penal Code (IPC), 1860 - Sections 409
Reported In
122(2005)DLT419

Excerpt

- - order 1. learned counsel for the state has attempted with great perseverance to submit that the respondent/accused has failed to produce the records and, hence, the prosecution was fully justified in drawing adverse inferences regarding shortfalls in stocks leading ultimately to his conviction under section 409, ipc. we find that the first appellate court upon appreciation of evidence, reached the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to produce the stock register as was seized.order1. learned counsel for the state has attempted with great perseverance to submit that the respondent/accused has failed to produce the records and, hence, the prosecution was fully justified in drawing adverse inferences regarding shortfalls in stocks leading ultimately to his conviction under section 409, ipc.2. we have perused the judgment of the trial court as also of the appellate court. we find that the first appellate court upon appreciation of evidence, reached the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to produce the stock register as was seized. the sales cash statements consisting of 204 pages and other statements consisting of 216 and 172 pages seized on 3rd june, 1987 were also not produced.3. the appellate court concluded that the production of these documents was necessary to connect the valuation of the alleged shortage to the charges framed against the appellant. the appellate court also held that the investigating officer too was not examined who could explain the circumstances in which these documents were not produced.4. we are in agreement with the reasoning of the first appellate court. we also find that the appeal has been preferred after an inordinate delay of 226 days. we dismiss the application for condensation of delay as also leave appeal bearing no. 67/2005.

Full Judgment

ORDER

1. Learned Counsel for the State has attempted with great perseverance to submit that the respondent/accused has failed to produce the records and, hence, the prosecution was fully justified in drawing adverse inferences regarding shortfalls in stocks leading ultimately to his conviction under Section 409, IPC.

2. We have perused the judgment of the Trial Court as also of the Appellate Court. We find that the First Appellate Court upon appreciation of evidence, reached the conclusion that the prosecution had failed to produce the stock register as was seized. The sales cash statements consisting of 204 pages and other statements consisting of 216 and 172 pages seized on 3rd June, 1987 were also not produced.

3. The Appellate Court concluded that the production of these documents was necessary to connect the valuation of the alleged shortage to the charges framed against the appellant. The Appellate Court also held that the Investigating Officer too was not examined who could explain the circumstances in which these documents were not produced.

4. We are in agreement with the reasoning of the First Appellate Court. We also find that the appeal has been preferred after an inordinate delay of 226 days. We dismiss the application for condensation of delay as also Leave Appeal bearing No. 67/2005.

Continue Your Research


AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial