( 1. ) THIS revision is directed against judgment dated 18-1-2000 passed by additional Sessions Judge, Kannaud in Cr. A No. 38/1999, whereby conviction of applicant for the offence punishable under Section 409 and sentence of 3 years R. I. and fine of Rs. 3,000/- was affirmed and appeal preferred against the judgment of JMFC Khategaon dated 24-3-1999 in Cr. Case No. 100/98 by the applicant was dismissed.

( 2. ) SHORT facts of the case are that applicant was working as Secretary of Sewa Sehkari Sanstha Maryadit, Loharda (herein after for short called as the society) from 27-9-1985 till 1988. When the cash book of the Society was examined by Ramchandra PW-7, Supervisor then it revealed that there was shortage of cash in the account of the Society to the tune of Rs. 19,608. 50 paisa. It was also found that there was shortage of 9 kg of cotton seeds in the stock of the Society. The matter was reported to the police on the basis of which offence was registered as per FIR Ex. P-4 and matter was investigated, after completing the investigation charge sheet was filed against the present applicant before learned Magistrate who after trial found him guilty and convicted and sentenced him as stated hereinabove. Appeal preferred by applicant also failed, so he has come before this Court by way of this revision. ( 3. ) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant Shri R. N. Gupta submitted that no sanetion for prosecution as envisaged under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. was obtained from the competent authority and so the prosecution of the applicant was bad in law for want of such sanction. It is also contended by him that as per the provisions of Section 76 (2) of the M. P. Co-operative Societies Act sanction for prosecution from Registrar Co-operative Society was also required, such sanction was also not obtained before prosecution of the applicant and on this count alone applicant deserves acquittal in the present case.

( 4. ) LEARNED Additional Sessions Judge has considered this aspect of the matter in paragraph 9 to 12 of the impugned judgment. It has been observed that applicant does not come in the category of such public servant who is not remove from his office save by or with the sanction of the Government so any sanction under Section 197 Cr. P. C. for prosecution is not necessary in the facts of the present case. Applicant was working on the post of Secretary, co-operative Society and his appointing authority was District Central co-operative Bank, Dewas. He does not come in the category of such public servants who cannot be removed from service save by or under the sanction of the Government, therefore, learned Lower Appellate Court rightly held that not obtaining sanction under Section 197 of the Cr. P. C. does not put any bar on taking cognizance of the offence against the present applicant.

( 5. ) SIMILARLY the provisions of Section 76 (2) of the Co-operatives societies Act are relating to the prosecution of a person under the provision of that Act and that provision has no application when a public servant is prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 409 of IPC. Therefore, learned Lower Appellate Court rightly held that Section 76 (2) of the co-operative Societies Act also does not come in the way of the prosecution of the applicant.

( 6. ) LEARNED Counsel for the applicant further submitted that applicant was ill when the said disputed entries were made in the record of the co-operative Society and he cannot be held responsible for making such entries and for misappropriation of any fund of the Society. In his absence due to illness entries in cash books were made by someone else namely Lakhanlal PW-1 who himself has admitted during his examination that when applicant was ill then the charge of Co-operative Society, Loharda was also given to him. This contention is also of no avail to the present applicant because admittedly the disputed entries in the cash book bears signature of the applicant so he cannot escape from