Nachhatar Singh Gill vs State of Punjab and Another

S.S. Grewal, J.—This petition u/s 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ''the Code'') relates to quashment of impugned first information report No. 71 dated 4-9-1988, under Sections 408/ 409, I.P.C. registered in the Police Station, Kotwal, Ludhiana, for misappropriation of a sum of Rs. 1, 30, 861.35.

In brief, the facts relevant for the disposal of this petition, as emerge from the impguned first information report, are that the petitioner was working as Cashier in Octroi Department of Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, whereas Jagjit Singh Walia was working as Assistant Cashier in the same Department. As a part of their duties, they were entrusted with the Municipal funds every day on account of collection of cash from octroi posts in Ludhiana. Those amounts were handed over to them by the Incharge of the octroi barriers (Octroi Moharrirs) against receipts in the inspection Books maintained at the barriers. Both, the petitioner and Jagjit Singh Walia had separate safes in the octroi office situated near Bazar Clock Tower, and, keys of those safes remained exclusively with each of them. The amounts so collected were required to be deposited daily by the concerned cashier in the United Commercial Bank, Chowk Mata Rani, Ludhiana. Both of them used to maintain the accounts of such receipts, which, are still with them and the bank deposit receipts were pasted by the petitioner in the cash book. An Assistant Superintendent of Octroi Department also maintains a separate cash book in which daily receipts and deposits are entered.

On 20th of April, 1988, Shri Jagjit Singh Walia made a report that Nachhatar Singh Gill the present petitioner, attended the office on 15-4-1988 and left the office saying that he wanted to meet the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, in order to narrate to him all the details of the incident of dacoity which took place on 14-4-1988. In that dacoity Rs. 3,02.748.42 had been looted. The petitioner did not hand over the key of his safe, or, the collections made by him, till then. On 21-4-1988 Shri Jagjit Singh Walia, submitted another report stating that there was an apprehended shortage of Rs. 1,43,423.57. The third report was submitted by the same employee to the effect that actual shortgage was to the tune of Rs. 1,50,861,35. The petitioner failed to resume duty in spite of the fact that he was told that the leave applied by him had not been sanctioned. On 21-4-1988, he came to the office, and opened the safe himself and handed over a sum of Rs. 5,245/-with a bunch of keys which was kept by him in his safe. He was asked by the Octroi Superintendent to explain the said shortage, but he evaded and slipped away without giving any explanation. Thereafter, the report regarding misappropriation was submitted to the Examiner, Local Fund Accounts, Punjab. The Director, Treasuries and Accounts and Local Fund Audit-cum-Joint Secretary to Government, Punjab, directed that the case be handed over to the police as it was a clear case of misappropriation, and, on the basis of the report made by the Commissioner, Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, the impunged first information report was registered.

The learned counsel for the parties were heard.

A careful perusal of the impugned first information report reveals that the petitioner, who, in his capacity as Head Cashier of the Municipal Corporation, had been receiving amounts, collected from the Octroi Moharrirs, was supposed to keep the same in safe custody, till those amounts were duly deposited in the account of the Municipal Corporation with the concerned bank, as per Government/ Departmental instructions. According to the allegations in the petition, on 14-4-1988 a dacoity was committed in which cash bag containing an amount of Rupees 3,03,748.42 carried by Shri Jagjit Singh Walia, Assistant Cashier was snatched away from him by the culprits, whereas, Rupees 5,50,000/- in cash carried by the petitioner in his bag, remained intact. Two of the police constables, escorting the petitioner and Jagjit Singh Walia, were shot dead at the time of the said occurrence. The petitioner has not been able to explain the shortage of the amount of Rs. 1,50,361.35, received by him in his capacity as Head Cashier on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana. Instead of giving any proper explanation concerning the shortage of municipal funds referred to above, he is not attending the office without any sufficient cause, and without obtaining any prior leave from the competent authority. In these circumstances, it is quite apparent that the petitioner was duty bound to deposit all the moneys received by him on behalf of the Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, in his capacity as Head Cashier, in the bank account of the said Corporation. The petitioner, has not furnished any reasonable explanation concerning his aforesaid lapse. Rather he seems to be deliberately evading attending his office.

The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that the said amount was pot personally entrusted to the petitioner, or, that no prima facie case for criminal breach of trust has been made out, is hardly tenable, at this stage. Certainly, it is not a case where there is total absence of allegations concerning the commission of offence of criminal breach of trust. Nor the impugned first information report lodged against the petitioner or consequent proceedings taken thereunder, amount to abuse of the process of the Court. Thus, there is no cogent reason for quashment of the impugned first information report, at this stage. It would, however, be open to the petitioner to take up all the pleas available to him during the trial. It is further clarified that any observation made herein for the disposal of this petition, shall not be construed to affect the merits of the trial. This petition is accordingly dismissed. Challan against the petitioner would be presented in the lower Court expeditiously preferably within one month.