JASBIR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Present petition under Sec. 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is for quashing of FIR No. 88 dated 28.10.2015 (Annexure P/4) under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 Penal Code and Sec. 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (for short, "the Act") registered at Police Station Shahpur Kandi, District Pathankot.

(2.) Facts relevant for the purpose of decision of the present petition; that the petitioner was working as Clerk in the office of Government Senior Secondary School, Badhani, during the period from 30.08.2000 to 7.1.2011, when a complaint was filed by Veena Kumari, Principal of Government Senior Secondary School, Badhani (hereinafter referred to as "the School") and on the basis of that, FIR No. 3 dated 7.1.2011 (Annexure P/1) under Sections 409, 467, 468, 471 Penal Code and Sec. 13(2) of the Act was registered at Police Station Division No.2, Pathankot. Challan was submitted and charges were framed by the Court and after trial, the accused was convicted and sentenced to undergo Rigorous Imprisonment for 5 years and fine to the tune of Rs.24.00 Lakhs vide its order dated 19.2.2015. The allegations against the petitioner in the said FIR No. 3 dated 7.1.2011 were regarding withdrawal of amount from GPF accounts of the employees of the School in connivance with the officials of Treasury Office by forging the signatures. Subsequently, the Education Department issued orders for 100% audit of the said school for the period from 1.4.2002 to 31.08.2010 and as per the Audit report, apart from GPF amount, the salary bills had been tempered with and an amount of Rs. 5,16,113.00 was found to have been withdrawn in excess after preparing separate total of bills, which were 29 in number. In all these matters, the present petitioner had withdrawn the amount after tempering with the cheques and that fact had been disclosed in the Audit report. On that basis, present case bearing FIR No. 88 dated 28.10.2015 (Annexure P/4) was registered under Sections 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 Penal Code and Sec. 13(2) of the Act at Police Station Shahpur Kandi, District Pathankot.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the registration of FIR No. 88 dated 28.10.2015 is complete mis-use of process of the Court because once the petitioner stood convicted and sentenced by learned trial Court vide order dated 19.2.2015, against which he had filed appeal, no subsequent FIR could be registered for the same alleged embezzlement and there is complete bar as per Sec. 300 of the Code of Criminal Procedure because a person once convicted or acquitted cannot be tried for the same offence. As per Sec. 300 Crimial P.C. no criminal case could be registered on the same facts. On this point, reliance was placed on the judgment from Honourable Apex Court in T.T.Antony Vs. State of Kerala, 2001 3 RCR(Cri) 436 and judgment from Co-ordinate Bench of this Court in Mahant Amar Dass Vs. State of Punjab and another, 2006 1 RCR(Cri) 971.