In a significant ruling, a court in Gautam Buddh Nagar has handed down a three-year jail sentence to a retired sub-postmaster for an act of cheating and criminal breach of trust that occurred 32 years ago. This long-standing case involved a money order fraud, and the verdict underscores the principle that public servants are held to the highest standards of honesty.
Alongside the prison term, the court also imposed a fine of ₹10,000 on the convicted individual. Failure to pay this fine will result in an additional year of imprisonment.
The judgment, delivered on October 31 by Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate (ACJM-I) Mayank Tripathi, found Mahendra Kumar, a resident of Pilkhuwa in Hapur, guilty under Sections 409 (criminal breach of trust by a public servant) and 420 (cheating) of the former Indian Penal Code.
The court referenced the Supreme Court’s 1988 ruling in the Ram Shankar Patnaik vs. State of Orissa case, which clearly stated that the act of refunding embezzled money does not absolve the offender. “Once the offence of criminal breach of trust is found as a fact, the return of the sum defalcated or the property entrusted does not wipe the offence. If the delinquent refunds the money defaulted, the court may reduce the sentence,” the order clarified.
Details from the prosecution reveal that the fraud dates back to October 12, 1993. Arun Mistry, residing in Noida’s Sector 15, sent a money order of ₹1,500 to his father, Madan Mahato, in Samastipur, Bihar. Mahendra Kumar, then serving as the Sub-postmaster at the Sector 19 post office in Noida, accepted the ₹1,500 along with a ₹75 commission.
However, Kumar never deposited the funds into the government account, instead issuing a counterfeit receipt to Mistry. When Madan Mahato did not receive the money, Arun Mistry filed a complaint with Post Office Superintendent Suresh Chandra on January 3, 1994.
An internal investigation confirmed that the total amount of ₹1,575 was indeed missing from government accounts and that the receipt was fraudulent. Consequently, Superintendent Suresh Chandra lodged a police complaint against Kumar at the local Sector 20 Police Station. During the departmental inquiry, Kumar admitted his wrongdoing and deposited the embezzled amount on February 8, 1994, even providing a written undertaking to return any similar amounts if future discrepancies were found.
In its final judgment, the court affirmed that the prosecution had conclusively proven the charges. “A government servant is expected to work with the highest honesty and integrity. Such crimes not only weaken the government system but also undermine public confidence,” the court remarked as it pronounced the sentence, emphasizing the severe impact of such breaches of trust.