State of Orissa vs Muralidhar Singh

K.B. Panda, J.—The Respondent Murlidhar Singh who was at the relevant time admittedly the Sarpanch of Biri-biri Grama Panchayat was prosecuted on a charge of criminal breach of trust in respect of Rs. 2392.50p. but was finally acquitted by the Subdivisional Judicial Magistrate, Sundergarh on 30-7-1974 and hence this appeal by the State.

The Respondent admitted the receipt of the amount. But his plea was that he had expended it over a medical and center as per the resolution of the Orissa Panchayat members (Ext. 9) dated 17-9-1971.

The prosecution examined 8 witnesses and the defence two. In view of the fact that the Respondent admitted the entrustment of the amount, it is not necessary to discuss the prosecution evidence. Even some of them particularly p. w. 5 has admitted how the Respondent has returned Rs. 2400/- to the Grama Panchayat fund. His evidence .in this regard is thus:

Accused did not do any work in respect of Medical aid Centre till date. Accused refunded Rs. 2400/- after institution of this case.

Cross-examination:1 cannot say the date, month or year in which accused refunded the money.

In the proceeding book of the relevant Grama Panchayat (Ext. 9) the proceedings of a meeting held on 17-9-1971 under third item in it is in respect of the present advance which is said to have been misappropriated. The material portion of it is thus:

... Rs. 2400/- is decided to be advanced for medical and centre.

The Village Level Worker pointed out that this goes against the Grama Panchayat Act, Section 97(2), 1964. The Sarpanch said The later on the approval of the District Collector has to be obtained and the amount adjusted. In case the District Collector does not approve of it, the amount would be realised from him.

There are several signatories to this proceeding of that date. This fits in with the evidence of p. w. 5 that Respondent had returned Rs. 2400/- which he had taken as advance. The learned lower Court has elaborately discussed this aspect of the case and has come to the finding that if at all it may be a case of temporary misappropriation and no such evidence having been led, the charge of Section 409, Indian Penal Code must fail. The learned lower Court has also come to the finding that under the provisions of the Grama Panchayat Rules any money taken by the Sarpanch from the Grama Panchayat fund would be recoverable after audit by a surcharge proceeding under Form No. 45. In that view of the matter, there is nothing to disturb the finding of the learned lower Court that the charge of criminal breach of trust cannot stand. Hence there is no case of temporary misappropriation that matter does not arise for consideration now at this stage.

As such the appeal stands dismissed.

Appeal dismissed.