RAJASHEKAR RAO SINDYA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition is filed against the order dated 28-9-1995 passed in P. C. No. 231/95 on the file of the XXI Addl. Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Bangalore City, taking cognizance of the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 of IPC and under Section 5 (2) read with Section 5 (1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on the allegation that the petitioner while working as clerk in State Bank of Mysore, Bangalore City, during the period between 1982 and 1984 abused his official position by corrupt or illegal means or by otherwise and obtained pecuniary advantage for himself by dishonestly or fraudulently making false entries in the fixed deposit ledger maintained with the Bank in the name of Rajasekaran furnishing false particulars and by making use of such false entries as genuine, knowing them to be false and by raising interest payment vouchers. It is also alleged that he opened another S. B. a/c No. 9554 in the Canara Bank, Vijayanagar Branch, Bangalore and got transferred the interest amounts totalling to Rs. 6,820/- maintained in the SBM, Bangalore. Thereby he had caused wrongful loss to the bank to the tune of Rs. 6,820/- and wrongful gain for himself.

(2.) LEARNED XXI Addl. Sessions Judge taking cognizance, framed charges against the petitioner. In support of the case of the prosecution, as many as 13 witnesses were examined and Exs. P-1 to P-42 were marked. After hearing both the parties and considering both oral and documentary evidence, the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused solely on the ground that P. W. 13 who had accorded sanction to prosecute the case had no authority. Subsequently, the respondent filed another charge sheet wherein the accused was prosecuted for the same offence which was alleged to have been committed by him on the same day as mentioned above. It is also mentioned in the charge-sheet itself that a charge-sheet was earlier filed against the accused before that Court on 23-12-1985 and the same was ended in acquittal of the accused petitioner by its judgment dated 31-3-1995 and in R. C. No. 26/82 in C. C. No. 35/87. As the said petitioner is dismissed from service no sanction is necessary to prosecute him and accordingly the present charge-sheet has been filed. On the basis of the present charge-sheet the learned Sessions Judge has taken cognizance of the offence and directed to issue process to the petitioner. The said order is questioned in this petition.

(3.) INSPITE of notice being served on the C. G. S. C. no one is present. Even the learned C. G. S. C. was sent words, but no body appeared for the respondent. Hence, the counsel for the petitioner is heard. Perused the records.