Pritisingh Gaurishankarsingh ... vs State Of Maharashtra, Through ...
2021 Latest Caselaw 4090 Bom

                                                    1              23-J-APL-730-15.odt


           IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY,
                     NAGPUR BENCH, NAGPUR

             CRIMINAL APPLICATION (APL) NO. 730 OF 2015

 Pritisingh Gaurishankarsingh Baghele,
 Aged : 48 years, Occu : Service,
 R/o Durga Chawk, Tah and
 District - Akola.                                           ... APPLICANT

                               VERSUS

 1. State of Maharashtra,
    Through Police Station Officer,
    Police Station, Gadchiroli,
    Tah. and District-Gadchiroli.

 2. Chhandak Govindrao Lokhande,
      Aged about : 42, Occ. Assistant
      Project Officer, Integrated
      Tribal Development Project,
      Gadchiroli, Tah. and
      District-Gadchiroli.                                   ... NON-APPLICANTS
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Shri A. V. Band, Advocate for applicant.
 Shri T.A. Mirza, Additional Public Prosecutor for non-applicant
 No.1-State.
 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                               CORAM: Z.A. HAQ & AMIT B. BORKAR, JJ.

DATED : 05/03/2021.

ORAL JUDGMENT : (PER : AMIT B. BORKAR, J.)

1. Heard.

2. Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith.

3. By this application under Section 482 of the Code

of Criminal Procedure, the applicant has challenged registration of

2 23-J-APL-730-15.odt

First Information Report No.107/2014 dated 27/12/2014

registered with the non-applicant No.1 - Police Station for the

offences punishable under Sections 420 and 409 of the Indian

Penal Code.

4. The First Information Report came to be registered

against the applicant with the accusations that the applicant along

with other accused persons shown false enrolment of 209 students

though the strength of 120 students was sanctioned and received

scholarship of Rs.1,06,31,015/- and the said amount was not

disbursed to the students and amount was misappropriated. It was

alleged that the society namely; Shri Sairam Bahu-uddeshiya

Gramin Vikas Sanstha, Sawli, District Chandrapur has cheated the

Government by forwarding forged documents, certificates,

application forms and caused loss of Rs.71,57,125/-. It is further

stated that the applicant was appointed as Assistant Account

Officer in Department of Integrated Tribal Development Project

Office, Gadchiroli and he worked in the said office from

20/05/2008 till 06/01/2013.

5. The applicant has, therefore, challenged the

registration of First Information Report by filing present

application. This Court on 13/10/2015 issued notice and by way

of ad-interim order, it was directed that the charge sheet shall not

be filed against the applicant.

3 23-J-APL-730-15.odt

6. In pursuance of the notice issued by this Court, the

non-applicant No.1 has filed reply stating that the applicant

worked as Account Officer in the Department of Integrated Tribal

Development Office, Gadchiroli from 20/05/2008 till 06/01/2013

and on the basis of report filed by the non-applicant No.2, First

Information Report was registered against the accused persons. It

is stated that during the course of investigation, it is revealed that

the employee of Integrated Tribal Development Project, Gadchiroli

has not carefully scrutinized and verified the documents submitted

by the officials of Shri Sairam Bahu-uddeshiya Gramin Vikas

Sanstha, Sawli, District - Chandrapur.

7. In Paragraph No. 5 of the reply, the non-applicant

No.1 has stated that during the course of further investigation, it is

revealed that the present applicant has not dealt with the record

of the matter pertaining to aforesaid college and therefore, there is

no material found against the applicant.

8. The applicant has filed additional affidavit dated

04/02/2019 annexing copy of bill sanctioned in favour of the said

society. The applicant in Paragraph No.4 has stated that the bills

which are subject matter of crime were sanctioned on 28/03/2014

and the applicant was working as Assistant Account Officer from

20/05/2008 till 07/01/2013. According to the applicant, the bills

4 23-J-APL-730-15.odt

in question are sanctioned after one year of his ceased to be

Assistant Account Officer from the said Department.

9. We have carefully considered the allegations in the

First Information Report, reply filed by the non-applicant No.1 and

the additional affidavit filed by the applicant. On careful scrutiny

of the material on record, it appears that the applicant was

working as Assistant Account Officer from 20/05/2008 to

07/01/2013 in the concerned Department. From the copy

annexed with affidavit, it appears that the bills in question were of

28/03/2014 when undisputably, the applicant was not working as

Assistant Account Officer as he has already ceased to be on the

said post on 07/01/2013.

10. In addition to above reasons, the Investigation

Officer in Paragraph No.5 of his reply has made a categorical

statement that during further investigation, it is revealed that

present applicant has not dealt with the record of the matter

pertaining to this college and therefore, there is no material found

against the present applicant.

11. In view of the aforesaid reasons, we are satisfied

that the continuation of proceedings against the applicant would

amount to an abuse of process of Court.

5 23-J-APL-730-15.odt

12. We, therefore, pass the following order :-

First Information Report No.107/2014 dated

27/12/2014 registered with the non-applicant

No.1-Police Station for the offences punishable

under Sections 420 and 409 of the Indian Penal

Code is quashed and set aside against the applicant

in this application only.

13. Rule is made absolute accordingly.

                      JUDGE                        JUDGE

 Choulwar