RAMESH CHANDRA Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) FINAL argument heard. Perused the record. Being aggrieved by the judgment dated 29-11-2004 passed by 6th additional Sessions Judge, Indore in Cr. A. No. 95/2004, whereby the judgment dated 30-9-2002 passed by Special Judicial Magistrate (CBI), Indore in Criminal case No. 8/96, whereby the petitioner was convicted under Section 420 of IPC for a period of two years with fine of Rs. 20,000/-, was confirmed, present revision petition has been filed.

(2.) IN short the case of the prosecution was that the petitioner was posted as Station Engineer at All India Radio, Gwalior. Petitioner applied for grant of Leave Travel Concession (hereinafter referred to as 'the LTC) on 6-10-94 for going to Kanyakumari along with his family. Along with the application petitioner submitted the reservation tickets on the basis of which a sum of Rs. 19,176/- were credited to the account of the petitioner. Later on upon a complaint lodged by one Navrang, the matter was investigated by CBI and it was found that the tickets which were submitted by the petitioner were got cancelled on 7-11-94 and in fact petitioner did not travel and availed the money of LTC. On the basis of these allegations charge-sheet was filed against the petitioner under Section 420 of IPC, on the ground that the petitioner submitted false bills of Rs. 20,070/-, wherein the date of journey of the petitioner was w. e. f. 14-11-94 to 21-11-94. The case was contested by the petitioner. After framing of the charges and recording of the evidence, learned Tribunal convicted the petitioner under Section 420 of IPC and sentenced for a period of two years and fine of Rs. 20,000/ -. An appeal was preferred against that order which was dismissed, hence this revision petition.

(3.) LEARNED Counsel for the petitioner argued at length and submits that complaint was filed by Navrang (P. W. 4), who was having inimical relations with the petitioner and one G. P. Ojha, but the prosecution was filed only against petitioner. Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that in fact the petitioner travelled for a period of six days of which all the particulars and tickets were submitted by the petitioner with the department, but all these documents were missing from the record. It is submitted that before filing of the prosecution no sanction was taken by the respondent under Section 197 of Cr. PC. It is submitted that since the sanction was mandatory, therefore, the prosecution of the petitioner was itself illegal, which deserves to be quashed. For this contention, reliance is placed on a decision in the matter of State of Orissa Vs. Ganesh Chandra Jew, 2004 Cr. LJ 2011, wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under: