VASANTLAL CHANDULAL MAJMUDAR Vs. NAVINCHANDRA MANILAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal miscellaneous application arises out of a order passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class Jhalod on an application by the accused. (Ex 6) in criminal case No. 1061 of 1978 praying that the prosecution be held as time barred and the offence therefore not cognizable.

(2.) A few facts necessary to appreciate the point which arises in this petition may be first stated. The petitioner accused at the relevant time that is for the period from 1971 to 1975 was a member of the Managing Committee as also the Chairman of the Jhalod Urban Co-operative Bank Limited. It was alleged that he committed an offence under sec. 147(1)(r) read with sec. 148(1)(r) of the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act 1961 (the Act) on or about 5.5.1971 by getting sanctioned from the bank a block capital loan of Rs. 50 0 in favour of Messrs. Sanjeli Rice Pulse and Small Industries in which firm he was a person interested) he being a partner thereof. It was alleged that inspite of bye-law No. 31 of the bank providing otherwise and in contravention thereof he remained present at the meeting of the Managing Committee of the said bank on 5.5.1971 and using his influence as the Chairman got the said loan sanctioned in favour of the said firm by getting a resolution passed by the managing committee and thereby he committed the said offence. It was also alleged that the general board of the bank on learning this appointed an inquiry committee on 10-8-1975 and the inquiry committee submitted its report to the District Registrar on 18-10-1975 The District Registrar Co-operative Societies Panchmahals thus for the first time it was the prosecution case came to know about the offence on 18-10-1975 and after getting the necessary sanction as provided under sec. 149(3) of the Act to prosecute the accused. filed the said complaint through complainant Navinchandra M. Shah Assistant District Registrar of Co-operative Societies Panchmahals at Godhra.

(3.) It was urged before the lower courts on behalf of the accused and it is also urged here by Mr. Patel the learned Advocate representing the petitioner accused that the period of limitation in the instant case would begin to run from the date of the offence that is 5-5-1971 and the prosecution launched therefore on 15-12-1978 was obviously time barred.