LATA MEHROTRA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) -This application under Section 482, Cr. P.C. has been filed for quashing of the proceedings in Criminal Case No. 1356 of 2002, Dharamveer Singh v. Kapil Arun and others, under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468 and 471, I.P.C., P.S. Kotwali Shahr, district Bijnore, pending in the Court of C.J.M., Bijnore.

(2.) THE first information report in this case was lodged against the applicant on 7.9.2002 by Dharamveer Singh, who showed himself as the manager of Arya Vedi Kanya Inter College, Bijnore. THE applicant was the lady acting Principal of the said college. THE co-accused were Kapil Arun, the administrator of the college and Mangla Prasad Sonia, the District Inspector of Schools, Bijnore (for short the D.I.O.S.). THE allegations in the F.I.R. were that the said college was run by the Arya Pratinidhi Sabha, Lucknow, which is a registered body. THE complainant, Dharamveer Singh, claimed himself to be the legally elected manager of the institution. THE applicant was suspended on 21.6.1999 by the managing committee. Information about the suspension of the applicant was given to the D.I.O.S., Mangla Prasad Sonia and the other authorities. It was alleged that in spite of that information, the co-accused Mangla Prasad Sonia, in collusion with another co-accused, Kapil Arun, the administrator, passed a fake bill of salary of the applicant on 23.8.1999. This was done with the object of embezzling Government funds.

(3.) LEARNED counsel for complainant-respondent No. 2 has submitted that the institution in which the applicant is alleged to have embezzled the funds was a grants-in-aid institution. There was no need for proving the mode of entrustment and the ingredients of the offence were made out as soon as there was wrongful appropriation of the funds by a person who was not entitled to the same. The applicant was not entitled to the withdrawal of her salary for the suspension period, and was entitled only for suspension allowance and, thus, dishonesty was writ large in the circumstances of the case. It was further submitted that there is a finding by the Investigating Officer that there was embezzlement. The applicant was not entitled to the salary as the matter was still pending before the D.I.O.S., who had not decided the same. The co-accused Kapil Arun was not entitled to function as the administrator and for signing the cheque, as by an order of the District Magistrate dated 20.8.1999, he was disentitled to function as the administrator on the material date, i.e., 23.8.1999.