HUKMA RAM Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner by this present Misc. Petition has challenged the order dated 19.11.1996 taking cognizance. By the order impugned. The learned trial court has taken cognizance against the petitioner under Sec. 120-B I.P.C. for adding and abetting the Manager of the Society for committing embezzlement. Jalaram Manager of the Society has allegedly embezzled a sum of Rs. 4,33,637.16.

(2.) The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the petitioner at that relevant time was Chairman of the Society. He might have committed violation of the bye-laws of the Society. Clause 13(1)(3) provides that the Chairman is required to sign on each and every documents written by the Society. But it cannot be said that he has committed a criminal offence.

(3.) It has been argued that from perusal of the audit report, the petitioner was alleged to be guilty of adding and abetting the Manager of the Society for committing embezzlement. Learned counsel for the petitioner has relied upon the decision of this Court in the case of Rajendra Kumar Vs. State, (S.B. Criminal Misc. Appeal No. 386/92, decided on 4.4.1996) . In that case, this Court has held that there is no material to show that the Chairman was in any way responsible for alleged illegalities and irregularities in the business of the Samiti.