This is a reference by the learned Sessions Judge, Nadiad, for quashing the proceedings started against the petitioner Chimanlal Kashibhai Patel, against whom a charge has been levelled by opponent No. 1, under S. 409 of the Indian Penal Code in regard to certain acts, which he did while he was continuing as President of the Nadiad Municipality till a new President was duly elected. The facts leading to this reference are this way :

2. The petitioner-accused was a councillor of the Nadiad Municipality prior to 9th March, 1958. On 9th March, 1958, he was elected as President of the Nadiad Municipality for a period of one year. After the expiry of the said period of one year, on 23rd March 1959, the accused was elected as President for a second term of one year. It appears that a Writ Petition No. 542/59 was filed immediately thereafter in the then High Court of Bombay challenging the election of the accused as President of the Municipality. An order was passed in this Writ Petition on 14th April 1959, setting aside the election of the accused as President of the Municipality. Under the rules of the Municipality, however, the accused continued as a President till the election of a new President. The accused filed an application for leave to appeal to the Supreme Court but that application was rejected by the High Court. It may be mentioned that in the original Writ Petition No. 542/59, the accused was made a party as President of the Navsari-Nadiad Municipality and the Municipality was joined as a second party. In that application for leave to appeal, the Nadiad Municipality was a co-applicant with the accused. The accused then filed an application for special leave to appeal to the Supreme Court. In this special leave application the Nadiad Municipality was joined as a co-applicant. The accused in his capacity as the President of the Municipality engaged lawyers on behalf of the Nadiad Borough Municipality as also for himself as President of the Municipality, and by his orders he directed the Chief Officer of the Municipality to pay the fees of the lawyers as well as the travelling expenses incurred by him as well as the Secretary of the Municipality in connection with these legal proceedings. It appears that in addition to the directing of the payment of these charges by the Chief Officer of the Municipality, the accused had also directed the payment of legal charges and travelling expenses in connection with other proceedings. These other proceedings were also two Writ Petitions by one Vinubhai Gordhanbhai Patel, bearing Nos. 461/59 and 649/59 in the Bombay High Court, filed against the accused as President of the Municipality, as well as against the Municipality itself, in connection with the cancellation by the Municipality on two occasions of the factory licence of said Vinubhai Gordhanbhai Patel. In connection with these two latter Writ Petitions also, the accused had engaged lawyers for himself as well as on behalf of the Municipality and he had directed the Chief Officer to nay the legal charges of the lawyers and the travelling expenses incurred by himself as well as by the Secretary of the Municipality. In addition to the above proceedings, there was another Writ Petition bearing No. 541/59, which was filed by three councillors of this Municipality against the Collector and the Municipality in connection with a notice of disqualification given by the Collector to them. Lawyers were engaged in this Writ Petition also on behalf of the Municipality and the accused as President of the Municipality had directed the Chief Officer for the payment of the legal charges and the travelling expenses of himself and the Secretary of the Municipality in connection with this Writ Petition also. All those charges ordered by him to be paid were without the sanction of the General Board of the Municipality.

3. On 29th September, 1959, the first Opponent, Jashbhai Motibhai Desai, who is the original complainant, filed a complaint