S N KANAVEEMAT Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner and two others were prosecuted by the respondent alleging that they being public servants, between 24.7.1992 to 21.6.1995, the accused persons criminally misappropriated without Rs.55,058.90 construction of the two vented dam projects at Puthila Village and Uruval Village of Belthangadi Taluk and thereby committed the offences punishable under Ss.409 and 34 IPC. After trial, the learned JMFC at Belthangadi, D.K., by a Judgment and order dated 31.10.2006 passed in C.C.No.709/1997 convicted all the 3 accused persons and sentenced them to undergo simple imprisonment for 2 years and pay fine of Rs.2,000/- each and in default of payment of fine to undergo simple imprisonment for further period of 6 months. Assailing the said Judgment and order, the petitioner filed Crl.A.No.324/2006. The 2nd accused/Krishnamurthy.D, filed Crl.A.No.344/2006. The 3rd accused/Govinda Reddy, filed Crl.A.No.355/2006 in the Sessions Court.

(2.) THE appeals were assigned to the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Puttur. Crl.A.No.344/2006 filed by Krishnamurthy. D /2nd accused in C.C.No.709/1997 on the file of JMFC, Belthangadi was allowed and the impugned Judgment was set aside on 5.2.2010.

(3.) THE petitioner and 3 others faced prosecution in C.C.No.709/1997 on the file of JMFC, Belthangadi for the alleged misappropriation of Rs.1,43,187.40 sanctioned for construction of vented dams and gally revetment work in Savanalu and Machina Villages of Belthangadi Taluk. It was alleged that there was forgery of documents and dishonest inducement of higher officer for sanction of Rs.1,43,187.40 by the accused. They were charge sheeted for the offences punishable under Ss.409, 468, 420 r/w 34 IPC. The case against the 1st accused - Ashok Koujalagi was split up and registered in C.C.No.617/2006. The learned Magistrate by a Judgment and Order dated 31.10.2006 convicted accused Nos.2, 3 and 4 and imposed the sentence. The petitioner who was accused No.2 assailed the said 3rd Judgment and Order in Crl.A.No.323/2006. The accused/ Krishnamurthy assailed the said Judgment and Order in Crl.A.No.345/2006. The other accused assailed the said Judgment and Order in Crl.A.No.344/2006, on the file of the Sessions Court at D.K., Mangalore. The three appeals were assigned to the Presiding Officer, Fast Track Court, Puttur. The employer had initiated the Departmental proceedings in respect of the very same allegations against all the accused persons. The Enquiry Officer submitted a report, that the charges have not been proved. The Disciplinary Authority accepted the said report and the charges were dropped. Crl.A.Nos.323, 344 and 345/2006 were allowed by a Judgment and Order dated 5.2.2010 on the ground that in view of the exoneration of the accused persons in the departmental enquiry, they can not convicted for the same charge in the Criminal Case.