REKHA SHARMA Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD Sri J.J. Munir, learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and Sri Dharam Pal Singh, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of opp. party No.2.

(2.) THIS criminal revision has been preferred against the judgment and order dated 22.12.2009 in Case No. 608/12/09 (Smt. Seema Sharma Vs. Balendu Sharma), under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station Banna Devi, District-Aligarh by which the application moved by opp. party No.2, complainant, for releasing of a sum of Rs.4,25,000.00 from the joint account of the revisionist and her late husband Balendu Sharma bearing S.B. Account No. 0511000200095353 maintained with Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Aligarh in favour of opp. party No.2 has been allowed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh. Brief facts of the case giving rise to the present revision is that a First Information Report was lodged by opp. party No.2 against the husband of the revisionist, namely, Balendu Sharma on 17.11.2008 which was registered as Case Crime No. 783 of 2008, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C., Police Station- Banna Devi, District-Aligarh alleging that she had gone to the Punjab National Bank to encash her cheques on 29.9.2008 where she found that revisionist's husband discharging his official functions. She further alleged that Balendu Sharma informed her that the funds to meet the cheque had not yet been received in her account and might be credited during late hours. Balendu Sharma took two cheques bearing No. 52857 from opp. party No.2 of her current account and cheque bearing No. 882708 of her S.B. Account each for a sum of Rs.2,08,000.00 and assured her that as soon as funds arrived in her account he would withdraw the money and deliver it to her. Complainant/opp. party No.2 trusted Balendu Sharma and gave him the said cheques keeping in view the personal friendship between the parties. On 4.10.2008, the complainant/opp. party No.2 came to know that a sum of Rs. 4,25,000.00 had been transferred from her current Account No.182500210005544 by Balendu Sharma to his own S.B. Account No.0511000200095353 maintained with the same bank i.e. Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Aligarh It further transpired that after the registration of the FIR, police investigated the matter from 18.11.2008 to 13.9.2009 and found that the husband of the revisionist late Balendu Sharma had dishonestly and fraudulently transferred the disputed amount of Rs. 4,25,000.00 from the S.B. Account of opp. party No.2 to his own S.B. Account which was with the Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Aligarh by forging certain documents, hence, found a cognizable case made out against him for the offence in question but as Balendu Sharma had expired on 2.10.2008, the police had to submit the final report in the case as the case could not proceed against the accused Balendu Sharma who had expired. Hence, the police submitted the final report in the matter in the Court of learned Magistrate. The acceptance of the final report is still sub-judice before the competent Magistrate till today.

(3.) ON the other hand, Sri Dharam Pal Singh, learned Senior Advocate, appearing on behalf of opp. party No.2 has argued that during the investigation a prima facie offence was disclosed against the husband of the revisionist Late Balendu Sharma who was an employee in the Punjab National Bank, Civil Lines, Aligarh. The opp. party No.2 had a current account as well as S.B. Account in the said bank. She runs a business in the name and style of M/s.Ambilee Hardware Company and she? is the proprietor of the said company. She used to receive payments from the foreign countries and she received payment from M/s. Samual Levis Ltd. (U.K.) and after clearance of the money from C.B.T. Mumbai, the same was credited in the account of complainant. She on 29.9.2008 at about 11.30 P.M. met the accused Balendu Sharma who had acquaintance and familiarity with her as he used to get the amount credited and deposited? in? accounts of? the complainant/opp. party No.2 from various business transactions in the Bank where he was employed. The complainant/opp. party No.2 took the help of Balendu Sharma for getting the cheques in question credited in her account.He further urged that? the final report submitted by the police during investigation of the case was merely? on the ground that the accused Balendu Sharma, husband of the revisionist, had expired and case could not proceed against him though while submitting the said report the Investigating Officer found a prima facie case against the husband of the revisionist for the offences committed by him under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. He further contended that no money was taken by opp. party No.2, complainant,? from the late husband of the revisionist as advance for the business.