Sawan Ram vs State of Haryana

K.P.S. Sandhu, J.

Sawan Ram Petitioner has filed the petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure with the prayer that the charge framed against him under Section 406/409 of the Indian Penal Code by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kurukshetra, vide his order dated 5th May, 1981, in case first information report No. 234 of 17th August, 1977, at Police Station, Thanesar, and all other proceedings thereunder be quashed. The facts which gave rise to this petition are as under :

The petitioner was employed as a salesman in the Central Cooperative Consumer Store Ltd., Kurukshetra. Shri O.P. Gupta was the Chairman of the Society and Shri S.P. Gupta was the General Manager thereof. The petitioner used to give his indents to the General Manager for the goods for the store, which bore signatures of the petitioner and the Manager used to distribute, the goods to the Salesman according to the indent. Entry of the goods thus in distributed used to be made in the ledger liability register of the Salesman and the signatures of the Salesman used to be obtained in the ledger liability register. On physical verification of the store made through the Cooperative Societies Consumer Store Department shortage of Rs. 21,506.09 Paise was detected. This shortage related to the period between 31st December, 1970 to 31st December, 1971. An amount of Rs. 995/ out of the pay of the petitioner and Rs 500/, which were lying as security with the Society were adjusted against the amount found due from the petitioner. Shri J.P. Bhardwaj, Inspector, Cooperative Societies, Karnal was appointed the Liquidator of the Society on 11th June, 1975. A case against the petitioner under the aforesaid Sections was registered on 17th August, 1977, at police Station, Thanesar, on the basis of a report made by the Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Kurukshetra.

The contention raised by Mr. S.P. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner is two fold. In the first instance he has submitted that from the facts as revealed in the first information report, the case does not fall within the mischief of Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Mr. Jatinder Sharma, learned counsel for the State of Haryana has very fairly conceded that the petitioner is neither a Public Servant, nor a Banker, merchant, factor, broker, attorney or agent within the meaning of section 409 of the Indian Penal Code. Therefore, the charge under Section 409 of the said Code cannot be sustained. The second contention raised by Mr. Gupta, learned counsel for the petitioner is the proceedings under section 406 of the Indian Penal Code are hit by section 468 of the Code of CriminalProcedure, these having been initiated after the period of limitation as prescribed in the aforesaid Section. On the other hard Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the State of Haryana, has submitted that since the Liquidator was appointed in 1975 and he learnt of the shortage in 1975 so the case was registered within limitation as envisaged by section 469 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, because the Liquidator came to know of the commission of the offence on 11th June, 1975 but I do not find any substance in the submission made by Mr. Sharma, learned counsel for the State, as it is in the first information report itself that the Executive Committee of the Society gave registered notice to the petitioner for depositing the aforesaid amount in the year 1972, and since the petitioner did not turn up on his duty, his services were terminated on 1st April, 1972. So it is evident that the authorities had the knowledge of the commission of the offence by the petitioner in the year 1972. The first information report, as noted earlier, was registered in the year 1977. So clearly the action against the petitioner is hit by the limitation as provided by Section 468 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. As a result I am left with no option but to quash a charge and all other proceedings in consequence of the first information report so registered. The petition is allowed.