Hori Ram Singh vs King-Emperor on 18 January, 1940
In Hori Ram Singh v.
Emperor(1), the medicines had not been entered in the stock
book, and were removed by the accused to his residence, and
the charge against him was that in so removing them he had
committed MISappropriation. It was no part of the duty of
the accused to remove medicines to his house, and he could
not claim that he did so by virtue of his office. He could
have made such a claim if he had, let us suppose, entered
the medicines in- the stock books and shown them as expended
in the hospital. But, on the facts, no official act was
involved, and that was why Varadachariar, J. observed that,
".... so far as the charge under section 409 was con
cerned, the acts in respect of which he was intended to be
prosecuted could not be regarded as acts done or purported
to be done in execution of his duty".