The special law does not prevail over the general law when the nature of the allegations does not strictly fall within the ambit of the special law.

Crl. M.A. No. 12478/2013 (Exemption)

Allowed subject to all just exceptions.

Crl. M.C. No. 3394/2013 & Crl. M.A. No. 12477/2013

1. Impugned order of 2nd May, 2013 upholds trial court's order whereby petitioner has been called upon to face trial for the offence under Section 409/420/477-A of IPC.

2. Petitioner's counsel assails the impugned order by urging that he had appeared before the revisional court and had specifically urged that the prosecution of petitioner for the offence under Section 409/477-A/420 IPC is uncalled for in view of the fact that the offence, if any, would fall under Section 118 of the Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 and that it was specifically pointed out to the revisional court that the special law would prevail over the general law and this aspect has not been dealt in the impugned order.

3. Upon notice, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for respondent-State rightly submits that petitioner cannot be prosecuted for the offence under Section 409 and under Section 420 IPC simultaneously. However, it is vehemently submitted by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State that the ingredients of offence of cheating are very much there and so petitioner's prosecution for the offence under Section 420/477-A IPC is well merited. Attention of this Court was drawn to FIR and charge-sheet of this case to point out that offence in question does not strictly fall within the parameters of Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 and therefore, bar of Section 21 of Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 will not apply.

4. After having heard both the sides and on perusal of the impugned order and the charge-sheet filed as well as the material on record. I find that the nature of allegations in FIR in question are such that prima facie, it cannot be said that they strictly fall within the ambit of Delhi Cooperative Societies Act, 2003 or that petitioner's prosecution for the offence under Section 420/477-A [PC is not uncalled for. Certainly, prima facie case for petitioner's prosecution for the offence in question is clearly made out. However, petitioner cannot be simultaneously prosecuted for the offence under Section 409 IPC as well as for the offence under Section 420 IPC and so, the petitioner is discharged for offence under Section 409 IPC. However, petitioner deserves to be prosecuted for the offences under Section 420/477-A IPC.

5. This petition and the application are disposed of in aforesaid terms while refraining to comment upon merits of this case, lest it may prejudice petitioner at trial.