Bhupinder Singh vs State

Adarsh Kumar Goel, J.—The petitioner is facing proceedings u/s 408 of Indian Penal Code and has preferred this revision petition against charge framed against him. Allegation against the petitioner is that while working as Secretary of Cooperative Agricultural Service Society, Maland, an amount of Rs. 1,28,585.50 was entrusted to him but he committed criminal breach of trust and thus, committed offence. The petitioner received the amount from a debtor of the Society but did not enter the same in the account books. The matter was referred to Arbitrator and the Arbitrator passed the award against the petitioner on 19.1.1989. Criminal proceedings were also pending simultaneously.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that once arbitration award has been made, the proceedings will stand transformed into civil proceedings and criminal proceedings could not continue. He placed reliance on a judgment of this Court in Kashmira Singh v. The State of Punjab 1989 C.C. C 119.

Learned counsel for the State on the other hand relied upon judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in M. Krishnan v. Vijay Singh and Anr. 2001(4) R.C.R. 406 and Kamaladevi Aggarwal v. State of West Bengal 2001(4) R.C.R. 522 to submit that in a commercial or money transaction, civil liability may be there but would not exclude criminal liability.

A Division Bench of this Court in State of Haryana v. Nawabuddin Khan 1997 CLJ 1629 after referring to the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Pratibha Rani Vs. Suraj Kumar and Another, , held that criminal law and civil law can run side by side and two remedies are not mutually exclusive. In Trisuns Chemical Industry Vs. Rajesh Agarwal and others, , it was observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that merely because an act has "civil profile" is not enough to stop action on criminal side.

It cannot, thus, be said that where ever civil proceedings are taken, criminal proceedings will be barred. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed.