Honble ARORA, J. — These two miscellaneous petition arise out of the order dated 2-11-92, passed by the Special Judge, Essential Commodities Cases (Additional Sessions Judge), Jodhpur, by which the learned Additional Sessions Judge dismissed the two revision petitions (Criminal Revision Petition No. 153 of 92 Mohan Lal vs. The State and Criminal Revision Petition No. 154 of 1992 (Mohan Lal vs. State) filed by the petitioner. As the controversy involved in both the miscellaneous petitions is the same, therefore, both these miscellaneous petitions are disposed of by this common Order.

(2). Petitioner Mohan Lal was working with "tie Jodhpur Central Cooperative Bank" (in brief, the bank) as the Branch Manager. While he was posted at the Osian Branch of the bank during the period of June 1980 to May 31, 1982, an F.I.R. was registered against the petitioner for committing criminal breach of trust and cheating the bank by altering the valuable securities under Section 409 and 420 I.P.C. While working as the Branch Manager at the Paota Branch (Jodhpur) of the bank during the period 4-6-82 to 31.7.82, an F.I.R. was registered, against the petitioner at Police Station, Mahamandir, Jodhpur, for committing criminal breach of trust by him with an intention to defraud the bank and he mutilated and falsified the accounts of the bank. After necessary investigations in both the aforesaid cases, the police present challans against the petitioner in the Court of the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate took cognizance against the accused-petitioner and thereafter framed the charges in both the cases. Aggrieved with the order framing the charges, the petitioner approached this Court and the criminal revisions, filed by the petitioner, challenging the orders framing the charges, were dismissed by this Court. The learned Magistrate thereafter proceeded with recording of the statements of the witnesses. The petitioner thereafter moved applications in both these cases for dropping the criminal proceedings on the ground that the proceedings were taken by the Department under Section 74 of the Rajasthan Cooperative Societies Act for the repayment of the amounts regarding which the petitioner is alleged to have committed criminal breach of trust and, therefore, the criminal proceedings with respect to these very items cannot continue and the continuation thereof will amount to abuse of the process of the Court and, therefore, the criminal proceedings against him should be dropped. The learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, by his order dated 1-11-1991, rejected both these applications filed in the aforesaid two criminal cases. The petitioner, aggrieved with the order dated 1-11-91, passed by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Jodhpur, rejecting his applications in both the cases, preferred revision petitions and both the revision petitions were decided by the learned Special Judge, E.C. Act Cases (Additional Sessions Judge), Jodhpur, by his order dated 2-11-92, who dismissed the revision petitions filed by the petitioner. It is against this order that the petitioner has preferred these two miscellaneous petitions challenging the order passed by the Court below. Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 37 of 1993 relates to the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner at Police Station, Mahamandir, Jodhpur, while Criminal Miscellaneous Petition No. 38 of 1993 relates to the F.I.R. lodged against the petitioner at Police Station, Osian.

(3). It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioner that where an accused is charged-with the offence of criminal breach of trust with regard to certain items then the question of civil liability with respect to those items has been determined by the competent court, the criminal proceedings must have been dropped and its continuation will be an abuse of the process of the Court. In support of its contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance over Rajendra K

Click Here to Read the rest of this document