HANSRAJ CHATURVEDI Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SRI J. N. Chaturvedi appeared for the applicant and the State Counsel appeared for the State. I have heard them.

(2.) THE prayer is that the proceedings against the applicant in the court of Chief Matropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur, in Crime No. 724 of 1971 and Case No. 1491 of 1978 State v. Hansraj Chaturvedi, under Section 409, IPC and also Crime No. 1286 of 1971 case No. 1492 of 1978, State of U. P. v. Hansraj Chaturvedi, may both be quashed. It is urged that the Government Treasurer, Sri Vishal Chand, alone can be said to be the agent of the Government and the applicant and like persons, simply in the employment of Vishal Chand Jain, would not be covered within the provisions and alleged mischief of Section 409 IPC. It is also stated that a civil suit filed by Sri Vishal Chand Jain against the applicant for the recovery of the amount is already pending, so the criminal action would not lie. THEre are certain other averments made in the case, which relate to question of facts and denial of the alleged embezzlement. THE law is now well settled. It has been held in the case of Delhi Municipality v. Ram Kishan, AIR 1983 SC 67 that under Section 482 CrPC question of facts are not to be considered, it is the function of the Magistrate. Whether an entrustment was made to the applicant is a question of fact. Whether he was an employee and in the course of that employment entrustment was made is again a question of fact and whether it was he who embezzled the amount is also a question of fact. THEse matters cannot be looked into by this Court. Other questions of facts and paints raised in that connection again cannot be considered.