MAZID HASAN SIDDHIQUI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed under section 482 of the Crimial P.C. 1973 for quashing of the proceedings of S.T.No.434/2018 pending before Third Additional Sessions Judge, Bhopal arising out from the charge-sheet of Crime No.315/2011 registered at Police Station Piplani, District Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sec. 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 of Penal Code and the provisions of M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960.

(2.) Brief facts of the case which are relevant for the disposal of this petition are that on 25.08.2009 complainant Santosh Singh made a complaint before Collector Bhopal regarding irregularities committed by the applicant and other co-accused persons in the affairs of Gopal Grah Nirman Sahkari Samiti. On that, Collector Bhopal forwarded that complaint for enquiry to Sub Registrar Cooperative Society, Bhopal who inquired the complaint and found that applicant and other co-accused had not got the Society's records audited from the year 1991 and did not maintain statement of accounts of assets of society and also illegally sold land measuring 0.445 Hectare, part of survey No.13, 14 and 18/1 situated at Village Khajuri Kala, Patwari halka No.19, Block Office Fanda, Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal and did not maintain the account of the said money and committed financial irregularities. In this regard complainant Santosh Singh also lodged a written complaint on 04.01.2011 to Superintendent of Police (South), Bhopal which was inquired by Raghunandan Shrothi, ASI. During investigation, it was found that the applicant Ex-Director of the society and co-accused B.P. Singh, Ex-President, S.K. Kapoor, Jagannath, A.P. Shrivastava, Smt. Vidhya Rajput and S.K. Vishwakarma, Ex-Directors of the society committed illegality and irregularities in the affairs of society and did not get the records of said society audited since the year 1991 and did not maintain statement of accounts of assets of society. They did not allot the society land to the members of society and fraudulently sold it to builders which was reserved for park. For that they also committed forgery in the layout plan of the society. They also illegally sold land measuring 0.445 Hectare, part of survey No.13, 14 and 18/1 situated at Village Khajuri Kala, Patwari No.19, Block Office Fanda, Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal and did not maintain the account of said money and committed financial irregularities. They did not handover the record of the society to Cooperative Department. On that police registered Crime No.315/2011 for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 of Penal Code and under the provisions of M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 against the applicant and co-accused persons and during investigation recorded the statement of Santosh Singh, complainant, Dhaniram, Sunil Kumar Singh, Mohd. Saleem, Ramesh Babu Gotele and Ramashankar Singh and after investigation filed the charge sheet against the applicant and other co-accused persons. On that S.T.No.434/2018 was registered and learned ASJ framed charges against the applicant for the offence punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 of Penal Code and Sub-Section 1, 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Sec. 72-D and 74 of M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Being aggrieved from that, applicant filed this petition.

(3.) Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that in the FIR as well as in the statements of prosecution witnesses recorded by the police during investigation, no specific allegation has been made against the applicant. Only allegation against applicant is that he was one of the director of the society and gave consent for sale of the land of society measuring 0.445 Hectare, part of survey No.13, 14 and 18/1 situated at Village Khajuri Kala, Patwari No.19, Block Office Fanda, Tahsil Huzur, District Bhopal. According to M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 society has a right to sell its property. There is no evidence on record to show that the said land was reserved for park in the approved layout plan of the society. So only on the basis that the applicant gave the consent to sell the land of society as one of the directors of the society, no offence is made out against the present applicant. Although it is also alleged that applicant did not maintain the account of said money and committed financial irregularities but the sale deed of said land was executed by the co accused V.P. Singh, the then President of the society and not by the applicant as mentioned in the sale deed of said land and in the case diary statements of prosecution witnesses Sunil Kumar Singh, there is no evidence on record to show that applicant had received any money from the said sale consideration on the contrary in the case diary statement of Sunil, it is mentioned that he gave sale consideration to co-accused V.P. Singh. It is also alleged that applicant and other co-accused fraudulently sold the society's land to builders which was reserved for park for that they also committed forgery in the layout plan of the society. But in this regard also there is no document and other evidence on record to show that applicant committed any forgery in the society's record. There is no allegation in the complaint that applicant committed fraud with anybody. So no offence under Sec. 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Penal Code is made out from the charge-sheet against the applicant. It is also alleged that applicant and other co-accused did not give the charge of society's record and did not get audit of the record of said society conducted since the year 1991 and did not maintain statement of accounts of assets of society. But there is no evidence on record to show that applicant has any record of the society or being a one of the directors of the society it was the duty of the applicant to get audit of the record of said society done. So no offence under M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 is made out against the applicant. Even otherwise according to Sec. 76 of the Act, 1960 for instituting the charge-sheet, for the offences punishable under M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 previous sanction of the Registrar in writing is necessary, while police filed charge-sheet without prior permission of the Registrar concerned. Therefore, learned trial court has no jurisdiction to take cognizance against the applicant for the offences punishable under M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. He further submitted that earlier also on the complaint of Santosh Singh, Dy. Registrar after conducting inquiry filed a complaint against the applicant and co-accused persons which was dismissed and prosecution did not take any further permission to file charge sheet against the applicant and co-accused persons from Registrar Cooperative Society, so cognizance cannot be taken against the applicant for the offence punishable under M.P. Cooperative Societies Act, 1960. Learned trial court without appreciating these facts wrongly framed charges against the applicant. So charge-sheet be quashed.