SUDESH KUMARI Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short 'Cr. P.C.') challenging the order dated 20.11.2010 (Annexure P-13) whereby, she was ordered to be summoned to face trial as an additional accused on an application moved by the prosecution under Section 319, Cr.P.C. and order dated 15.03.2011 (Annexure P-14)

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that in fact petitioner had joined as a Head Mistress on 14.08.2001.

(3.) Petitioner came to know that some records were being forged by Nirmala Devi, Social Studies Mistress working as Head Mistress in Government High School, Kularan, Patiala. Petitioner started writing letters to Nirmala Devi to produce the relevant record. However, the said record was not produced by Nirmala Devi. Thereafter, petitioner moved an application to the District Education Officer (S) Patiala and the matter was duly inquired by the said officer. During inquiry, it was found that Nirmala Devi and Sangeeta Rani were liable to be criminally prosecuted with regard to embezzlement of the funds committed by them. So far as petitioner is concerned, she was found innocent. Petitioner had appeared during trial as a prosecution witness. However, thereafter prosecution had moved an application under Section 319, Cr.P.C. for summoning the petitioner as an additional accused. Petitioner had unearthed the fraud being committed by Nirmala Devi and Sangeeta Rani and could not be penalized for her said act.