Smt. Pushp Lata Nigam vs State Of U.P. & Others
2013 Latest Caselaw 6364 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
 
 

?AFR
 
Court No. - 51
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 654 of 2002
 

 
Applicant :- Smt. Pushp Lata Nigam
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. & Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- D.K. Singh,A.P. Sahi
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- Govt. Advocate
 
Hon'ble Ramesh Sinha,J.

1. The present 482 Cr.P.C. application has been filed with the prayer to quash the proceedings of Case No. 3265 of 2001, under Sections 420/409 IPC, P.S. Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur Nagar pending in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.

2. The prosecution case in brief is that an FIR was lodged on 31.01.2001 by informant/ opposite party No.2 Shitla Singh President Abhibhawak Adhyapak Association, Kanpur Vidya Mandir Mahila Inter College, Swaroop Nagar, Kanpur Nagar against the applicant Smt. Pushplata Nigam alleging that she was working as Principal since 05.02.2000 in the said college. The Committee of Management vide the resolution dated 09.12.2000 under emergent situation had discharged her from the said post with immediate effect by giving her advance salary of a month. It is further stated that all the amount which are disbursed above Rs.500/- are under the joint signatures of the Vice President and the Principal. The applicant without any proper information and knowledge had got a bill and a cheque issued and signed by fraud and misrepresentation from the informant/ opposite party No.2 of Rs. 2,800/- vide Cheque No. 978482 dated 04.12.2000 for which the payment has also been made. for getting a name plate. The complainant came to know that the name plate was made in the

                                                   -2-

joint name of the applicant and her husband for affixing it at her house. The said information was given to him by one of the presentative of the Committee of Management, namely, N.K.Shukla vide letter dated 06.12.2000. On the basis of the resolution of the College dated 08.01.2001, a decision was taken that the applicant Smt. Pushplata Nigam had embezzled the said amount and misused the same.

3. On the basis of the said allegations FIR was registered for the offence under Sections 419, 420 IPC as Case Crime No. 230/2001, P.S. Swaroop Nagar, District Kanpur Nagar. The investigation of the case was carried out and charge sheet was submitted against the applicant for the offence under Sections 409, 420 IPC in the Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar, on the basis of which cognizance was taken by the Magistrate and the applicant was summoned for trial vide order dated 22.09.2001. Hence applicant has filed present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for quashing of the proceedings of the aforesaid case pending before the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Kanpur Nagar.

4. Heard Sri D.K.Singh learned counsel for the applicant and Sri R.K.Maurya learned AGA for the State. Sri H.N.Tripathi learned counsel for the opposite party No.2 is not present, though the matter is called in revised list.

5. It has been submitted by learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant was an Officiating Principal since 05.02.2000 and she was illegally dismissed from service by the Committee of Management on 09.12.2000 and her dismissal from service was disapproved by District Inspector of Schools vide order dated

                                                -3-

14.12.2000. It was argued that after the dismissal of the applicant was disapproved by the District Inspector of Schools who also issued notice on 22.12.2000 to the Committee of Management of the institution to show cause as to why it was in the interfering in the functioning of the applicant. He further pointed out that the Committee of Management in collusion with the opposite party No.2 did not submit the salary bill of the applicant and Joint Director of Education, Kanpur Division, Kanpur vide order dated 16.01.2001 issued notice under Section 6(2) of the Payment of Salary Act calling upon Committee of Management as to why the action be not taken against them. The District Inspector of Schools vide order dated 19.01.2001 directed the Finance and Account Officer to continue the payment of salary to the applicant. Moreover, the Committee of Management also filed the writ petition against the order of District Inspector of Schools being Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 3796 of 2001 concealing material facts and ultimately when the counsel for the applicant had put in appearance in the said writ petition, pointing out the correct and true facts before the Court, it was permitted to be withdrawn by the Committee of Management by the Court. A copy of the said order dated 07.02.2001 passed by this Court has been annexed as Annexure No.3 to the affidavit.

6. It was also pointed out that the Committee of Management had also filed a Civil Suit being Suit No. 1279 of 2000 in the Court of ACMM, IX ,Kanpur Nagar, which was also dismissed as withdrawn vide order dated 18.02.2001, a copy of the same has been annexed as Annexure No.4 to the affidavit. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that when opposite party No.2 who was

                                             -4-

colluding with the Committee of Management failed to oust the applicant from the post of Principal of the said institution, he got the present first information report registered against the applicant on false and frivolous allegations alleging that applicant had made payment of Rs.2800/- without apprising opposite party No.2 and got the cheque signed by him due to misrepresentation and without his consent. He submitted that the present proceedings against the applicant is a malicious one. Moreover no offence what soever is made out against the applicant from the material on record.

7. The learned AGA on the other hand vehemently opposed the prayer for quashing the aforesaid proceedings against the applicant but he could not dispute the aforesaid fact which has been argued by learned counsel for the applicant.

8. The learned counsel for the opposite party No.2, has not appeared before the Court though the matter has been called in the revised list but from the record it appears that counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of opposite party No.2 along with stay vacation application. From perusal of counter affidavit, it appears that only formal denial has been made by the opposite party No.2 with respect to contents of the affidavit filed in support of application under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

9. Considered the submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties.

10. From perusal of the record, it is apparent that the present proceedings against the applicant appears to be malicious one and

                                           -5-

opposite party No.2 had tried to oust the applicant from the post of Principal in collusion with the Committee of Management of the institution. The dismissal of the applicant was also disapproved by the District Inspector of Schools. The Committee of Management and the opposite party No.2 did not allow the applicant to work as Principal of the institution even her salary was also stopped by the Committee of Management for which notice was also issued by the Joint Director of Education and the applicant was also allowed to work as a Principal of the institution. It was also directed by the District Inspector of Schools for continuation of payment of salary to the applicant vide order dated 19.01.2000. Aggrieved by the said order authorities the Committee of Management had also approached this Court and filed a writ petition which was withdrawn by the Committee of Management and further civil suit was also filed by the committee of Management which was also withdrawn by the Committee of Management with the permission of the Court when it realized that it could not succeed in ousting the applicant from her post of Principal. Hence the present criminal prosecution has been initiated by opposite party No.2 with the malafide intention and malicious prosecution of the applicant.

11. From the allegations made in the FIR as well as in the charge-sheet, no offence under Sections 409, 420 IPC is made out against the applicant. It is informed that the applicant has already retired from her service.

12. The present case also falls in one of the category of the judgment of Apex Court in the case of State of Haryana Vs. Bhajan Lal, 1992, SCC (Cr.)426 where it has been held that if the

                                               -6-

proceedings have been initiated for a malicious prosecution it can be quashed by the High Court in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

13. In view of the aforesaid forgoing discussion, the proceedings against applicant are hereby quashed.

14. Accordingly, present Application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is allowed.

Order Date :- 8.10.2013

S.A.A.Rizvi