NIRMAL SINGH DHILLON Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) IN the present petition as well as in Crl. Misc. No. 7969-M of 1989 common questions of fact and law are involved and as such both these petitions shall be disposed of by one judgment.

(2.) IN brief, facts relevant for the disposal of the present petition are that the petitioner while working as the Secretary of the Wadala Jadeed Co-operative Agriculture Service Society Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Co-opeative society) did not deposit Rs. 57,189.60 in the account of the said society with the bank, even though he had made entry in this regard in his own band on 11-12-1985 at page 30 in the case book. The said amount was not deposited even though the Manager of the said society gave one month's time to the present petitioner to deposit the aforesaid amount in the account of the society. Thereafter, the society through its Secretary filed a suit for arbitration before the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, who, vide his separate award dated 12-1-1987 (Annexure PT-1) held the present petitioner liable for the amount of Rs. 57,189.60 as the principal amount together with interest at the rate of 12-1/2% per annum, dated 28-2-1986 amounting to Rs. 1710/- together with Rs. 250/- as costs of the arbitration and also awarded interest at the rate of 12-1/2% per annum till the realisation of the principal amount from the petitioner. It was also directed that the said amount could be recovered from Mohan Singh who is a guarantor of the Secretary of the society. It was further pleaded that after the passing of the aforesaid award the impugned FIR No. 141 of 1987 was registered at Police Station, Sadar Jalandhar on 27.4.1987 against the present petitioner on the basis of the letter written by Assistant Registrar, Co-operative Societies, Jalandhar to the Sr. Supdt. of Police, Jalandhar dated 10-4-1987 under section 409 of the Indian Penal Code regarding embezzlement in respect of aforesaid amount of Rs. 57,189.60. The present petition relates to the quashment of the impugned First Information Report referred to above. The quashment is sought mainly on the ground that the subject matter of the award is also the subject matter of the First Information Report and the registration of the impugned First Information Report on the same facts, after passing of the award of the arbitrator is clearly an abuse of the process of the Court.

(3.) IN both these cases on behalf of the State it was pleaded that the petitioner with dishonest intention committed embezzlement concerning the amounts in respect of which the arbitrator had given the awards and criminal offence under section 409 of Indian Penal Code is made out against the petitioner.