RANBIR KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for brevity 'the Code') prays for quashing three orders dated 1.11.2004 (Annexures P.4 to P.6) passed by the Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Patiala. The Magistrate has declined the request of the accused-petitioner for lumping together all the eight charges in the three different challans concerning criminal misappropriation and embezzlement in respect of different charges relating to the year 1989 on the ground that joinder of more than three charges in one challan is impermissible in law and that the prosecution evidence has already been completed. It has also been held that an order was passed on an earlier occasion declining the similar prayer with the observation that the objection could be raised at the time of arguments.

(2.) FACTS which are necessary for deciding the controversy raised in the instant petition are that the accused petitioner was working as Secretary of Nagawa Coop. Society (for brevity 'the Society') which fell within the territorial jurisdiction of Kamalpur. A complaint was filed by the Inspector Cooperative Societies, Kamalpur alleging that the accused-petitioner while working as Secretary of the Society retained cash in hand worth Rs. 61,064.34. The afore-mentioned amount in the hands of the accused-petitioner was collected from members of the society in the shape of recovery, interest, membership fee etc. w.e.f. 30.1.1989 till the date of registration of FIR i.e. 19.8.1989. The accused-petitioner allegedly mis-appropriated the amount and is alleged to have mis-utilised the same for his personal use thereby causing a loss to the society. In accordance with the resolution dated 2.6.1989 passed by the Society a request was made for registration of the case against the accused-petitioner and for effecting recovery. On the basis of the afore-mentioned resolution FIR No. 178 dated 19.8.1989 under Section 408 read with Section 406 IPC was registered at P.S. Sadar, Patiala, against the accused-petitioner. Thereafter three challans were presented against the accused-petitioner alleging mis-appropriation for different periods. The first challan is reflected in the impugned order Annexure P-4. It alleges mis-appropriation on three dates on viz. 30.1.1989, 6.2.1989 and 18.2.1989. The second challan also specifies mis-appropriation on three dates viz. 27.2.1989, 28.2.1989 and 11.8.1989 and the third one alleges mis-appropriation on two dates i.e. 16.3.1989 and 18.3.1989. At the time of framing the charge it was submitted by the accused-petitioner that the allegations of the prosecution were the same and were spread over the period of less than one year. The prayer for consolidation of all the three charges was however declined by the trial Court by observing that the afore-mentioned objection could be agitated at the time of final arguments.

(3.) SHRI P.K. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that according to Section 212(2) read with Section 219 Cr.P.C. when an accused is charged with mis-appropriation of money then it is sufficient to specify the gross amount and the date between which the offence is alleged to have been committed without specifying particular items or exact dates. According to the learned counsel such a charge is to be deemed as charge of one offence within the meaning of Section 219 of Cr.P.C. Learned counsel has also argued that presentation of three challans and separate trials would prejudice the interest of the accused-petitioner.