H.S. GUPTA Vs. KUMAR PANDEY AND ANR.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision has been filed under Section 397 / 401 of Cr.P.C. against the order dated 26.11.2015 whereby learned First Additional Session Judge, Sidhi framed the charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 420 / 34 , 467 / 34 , 468 / 34 , 471 / 34 of the IPC and Section 6 of Madhya Pradesh Vinirdishta Bhrashta Acharan Nivaran Adhiniyam (hereinafter referred to as "Adhiniyam).

(2.) Brief facts for the case which are relevant to the disposal of this petition are that complainant/respondent No.1 Shrikumar Pandey filed a private complaint before Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sidhi averring that in the year 2001 Madhya Pradesh Government sanctioned Rs.2,00,000/- for repairing work of Sidhi Dam and Canal and Collector directed to co-accused Kapil Agnihotri, Executive Engineer, Water Resources Department, Sidhi to conduct said repairing work. That work of repairing was done by the applicant H.S. Gupta, the then Sub-Divisional Officer, Water Resources Department, Sub-Division, Sidhi and co-accused Kapil Agnihotri. It was alleged that they prepared seven forged muster-roll Nos.(i) 03790/8, (ii) 03808/4, (iii) 03808/10, (iv) 03808/12, (v) 03808/15, (vi) B3808/16, (vii) 03790/29, in which the name of some persons who employed in other departments and some persons who died two years ago were mentioned and they withdrew the payment in the name of these persons mentioning that they also did job in the repairing work of Dam and Canal and embezzled that amount, so action be taken against them. On that learned JMFC recorded the statements of complainant/respondent No.1 Shrikumar Pandey and his witnesses, thereafter, took cognizance against the applicant and co-accused for the offence punishable under Sections 167 , 466B , 468 , 471 & 120-B of the IPC and registered the Criminal Case No.1434/2008 and vide order dated 17/2/2014 learned JMFC committed the case to the court of Sessions. On that, S.T. No.56/2014 was registered which is pending before 3 rd ASJ, Sidhi. Learned ASJ Vide order dated 26.11.2015, framed charge against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 420 / 34 , 467 / 34 , 468 / 34 , 471 / 34 of IPC and Section 6 of Madhya Pradesh Vinirdishta Bhrashta Acharan Nivaran Adhiniyam. Being aggrieved from that order, the applicant filed this revision.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that there is no evidence on record to show that the applicant prepared any fake muster roll or took any payment from the department showing the name of the dead persons in the muster roll. The task of preparing the muster roll and filling up the attendance of the workers engaged in the work was of the timekeeper and Sarpanch. The applicant had no role to play in that work. So even if it is assumed that the name of some person is wrongly mentioned in the muster roll applicant is not liable for that. Likewise, according to the provisions of Section 37 & 39 of the Adhiniyam, no Court can take cognizance of the offence punishable under the Adhiniyam without prior permission of the Commissioner, while in this case learned trial Court without sanction of Commissioner took cognizance against the applicant for the offence punishable under Section 6 of the Adhiniyam and wrongly framed charges against the applicant for the offences punishable under Section 420 / 34 , 467 / 34 , 468 / 34 , 471 / 34 of IPC and Section 6 of the Adhiniyam. In this regard learned counsel of the applicant also placed reliance on this Court judgement passed in the case of Murlidhar Agrawal Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in 2011 (3) MPLJ 152, S.P. Kori Vs. State of M.P. (2001) 2 MPLJ 702 and another judgement passed by Division Bench of this Court in the case of Jaynaryan Para Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh and another in M.Cr.C.No.4076/2014 dated 16/7/2014.