SOHAN LAL Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this misc. petition under section 482 Crimial P.C. it is prayed that the impugned order dated 26.6.93 be quashed and set aside and the entire criminal proceedings in case No. 235/83 be dropped.

(2.) The facts of the case are that on 23.10.82, Zila Ayurvedic Adhikari Bharatpur lodged a written report in Police Station Kotwali Bharatpur against the accused-petitioner alleging that the accused-petitioner committed two offences while he was in Government service. The petitioner was posted as Class-IV (Paricharak) under the control of Zila Ayurvedic Adhikari, Sawaimadhopur during the year 1974-75. The service of the petitioner in Sawaimadhopur was neither terminated nor he resigned from that service, and he got entered, his name as unemployed person in District Employment Exchange Office, Bharatpur at No. 727/75, thereafter he got service in Govt. Ayurvedic Pharmacy, Bharatpur on the basis of registration in Distt. Employment Exchange Bharatpur. In Aug. 1982, the District Ayurvedic Officer came to know about this fact, while he received a letter from Distl. Ayurvedic Officer Sawaimadhopur that petitioner was in service of Distt. Ayurvedic Office, Sawaimadhopur and without resigning or termination he got registered himself in the office of Distt. Employment Exchange Bharatpur. The second allegation against the petitioner was that while he was working as Class-IV servant (Paricharak) in Govt. Hospital Ncvara, Distt. Bharatpur he remained absent from 22.1.1980 to 10.3.1980 and his absent was marked in the Attendance- register, but he tampered with the Attendance-Register and he marked his presence by way of over-writing. On this the FIR was lodged and the same was registered at No. 34/83 in Police Station Kotwali, Bharatpur. The investigation was conducted and the challan was filed. On the basis of charge-sheet filed by the police, the magistrate took cognizance and framed the charges for the offence under section 420 & 466 IPC. The statements of Shyam Kumar Saxena PW. 1, Rajendra PW. 2 and other five witnesses were recorded till Aug. 1987. The petitioner was convicted for the offences under section 420 & 466 Penal Code vide judgment dated 24.6.1989.

(3.) The petitioner preferred an appeal against his conviction. The appellate court found that the charges of aforesaid sections have been framed contrary to the provisions of Sec. 219 of Crimial P.C. and therefore, set aside the conviction of the petitioner and remitted the matter back to the trial court with a direction to re-frame charges, in accordance with law, vide order dated 7.3.1992. Against that order the petitioner has also preferred the Misc. petition before this Court and this court vide order dated 16.4.92 observed that the CJM Bharatpur after hearing the arguments afresh decide objectively as to whether there is sufficient material to frame the charge. Thereafter, vide impugned order issued 26.6.93 the charges have been framed against the petitioner for the offence under section 420 IPC.