AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
K. N. Keshavanarayana, J.—In this petition filed u/s 482 of Cr. P.C., the petitioner has sought for quashing the prosecution launched against him in C.C. No. 390/2012 on the file of the Principal C.J.M., Mangalore, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 468, 471, 420 of IPC inter alia on the grounds that, in respect of the very offences, another charge sheet has been filed and case in C.C. 389/2012 is pending consideration. Therefore, there could not have been two separate prosecution against him for the similar offences. The petitioner was working as Postal Assistant in Gandinagara Sub-Post Office, Mangalore, between 01.09.2009 to 16.10.2010 and during that period, he also appears to have officiated as Sub-Post Master during the leave or vacancy of the regular Sub-Post Master.
Smt. N. Laxmi Arun Padiyar, lodged a report on 27.10.2010 before the jurisdictional police inter alia alleging that on 27.10.2010, when she went to the Post Office to withdraw the amount from her Savings Bank Account, to her shock, she noticed that a sum of Rs. 60,000/- was shown to have been withdrawn from her account on 08 09.2010 and she alleged that the petitioner herein working as Postal Assistant has withdrawn the said amount illegally and unauthorisedly by forging her signature on the withdrawal form. Based on that report, the case in Crime No. 97/2010 came to be registered. A report dated 17.11.2010 came to be filed by the Inspector of Post Office, Mangalore North Sub-Division, before the Station House Officer of Barke Police Station, alleging that the petitioner while working as Postal Assistant and also officiating as Sub-Post Master, had accepted the deposits from Savings Bank Account Holders, but did not credit the same to the Post Office Account. The details of those accounts were also furnished in the said report. Based on the said report, case in Crime No. 101/2010 came to be registered against the petitioner for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 468, 471, 420 of IPC, Both the cases were investigated independently and ultimately the Investigating Officer filed charge sheet in both the cases which came to be registered as C.C. Nos. 389/2012 and 390/2012. In C.C. No. 389/2012, it is alleged that the petitioner while working as Postal Assistant between 01.09.2010 to 16.10.2010 had unauthorisedly and illegally withdrawn the amounts to the tune of Rs. 5,40,682/- from the Savings Bank Account of CWs. 5 to 24 by forging their signatures on the withdrawal forms and thereby has committed the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 420, 468, 471 of IPC. Perusal of the charge sheet filed in C.C. No. 389/2012 in relation to Crime No. 101/2010 indicates that the informant in C.C. No. 390/2012 namely, C.W. 1- Smt. N. Laxmi Aurn Padiyar is not cited as the witness in the charge sheet in C.C. No. 389/2012. Though the offences alleged in both the charge sheets are identical, however, the facts complained in two charge sheets relate to different amounts. Therefore, continuation of prosecution in both the cases cannot be termed as illegal. However, having regard to the facts that the allegations made in both the charge sheets relate to the discharge of duty by the petitioner as Postal Assistant in Gandinagara Sub-Post Office, Mangalore, during the period from 01.09.2009 to 16.10.2010 and in view of the similarity of the offences alleged, it is just and proper for the trial court to try both the cases together and dispose of the same simultaneously.
With the above observations, the petition is rejected.