1994 Supreme(MP) 452

P.N.S. Chouhan, J.
Poonam Dewar v. State of M.P.
Misc. Cr. Case No. 3429 of 1991 (J); Decided on 13.5.1994*.

Headnote:(1) Criminal P .C., 1973 -- S. 482 -- proceedings under -- normally accused is not entitled to file papers showing his innocence -- in special case he may be so allowed if official record is filed.

        (2) Penal Code, 1860 -- Ss. 409, 467 and 468 -- facts necessitating decision after recording evidence u prosecution cannot be quashed.

        ¼1½ naM izfdz;k lafgrk] 1973 & /kkjk 482 & ds v/khu dk;Zokgh & lkekU;rFkk vfHk;qDr dks viuh funksf"krk nfkZr djus ds fy, dkxti= Qkby djus dk gd ugha gS & foks"k ekeys esa mls vuqKkr fd;k tk ldrk gS ;fn kkldh; vfHkys[k Qkby fd;k tkrk gSA

        ¼2½ naM lafgrk] 1860 & /kkjk 409] 467 rFkk 468 & rF;ksa ds fu"d"kZ ftuds fy, lk{; vk‘o;d gS & vfHk;kstu vfHk[kafMr ugha fd;k tk ldrkA

        The criminal proceedings are assailed on the following grounds viz.,

        (i) Malafides, it is ·contended that the setting aside of Collectors order by State Administrative Tribunal hurt her age and she obtained a back dated letter purporting to be written on 19.4.59 from the in-charge Chief Municipal Officer (Annex. P/3) to foist this false Criminal Case against the petitioner.

        (ii) The trial Court gravely erred in holding that the acts constituting offence are not done by the petitioner in course of his official duty and, therefore, no sanction for prosecution was required.

        (iii) The complaint is false as the T. V. Set was purchased in pursuance of a valid resolution and is entered in the Stock.

        Held: The respondent-has not filed any return. In absence of counter affidavit, the facts given in the petition have to be accepted.

        The facts of the Criminal Case as given in the impugned order, dated 23.9.91 are as follows. The petitioner purchased a Selora T.V. Set from Agrawal Radio Shop and made payment of Rs. 4,000/- by cheque from Municipal Fund. On 13.5.89 he purchased electrical goods from Taj electrical owned by Nand Kumar and made payment of Rs. 2,0001- by two cheques of Rs. 1,000.00 each out of Municipal, Funds. Articles thus, purchased have been used by him personally. He received Rs. 220.00 by issuing receipt of the cattle pound and misappropriated the sum.

        Petitioners learned counsel contended that Annexure P-4 is resolution No 1 (A) passed on 30.4.88 by the Administration for purchase of T. V. Set for the reading room run by Municipal Council. The set was purchased in pursuance of this valid resolution for the Reading room and the same was installed on 16.8.88. Annexure P5 is the proceeding of the said purchases. Under the rules. Annexure P4 also contains resolution No.2 passed on 27.9.88 authorising the C.M.O. to keep cash upto Rs. 250.00 for contingent expenditure under section 108 (u) of M.P. Municipalities Act, 1961. Annexure P. 6 is the proceedings of purchase of electrical goods and Annexure P- 7 shows deposit of Rs. 220.00 in Bank. All these documents go to show that the said purchases were made for the Municipal Committee after following prescribed rules and the allegations of embazzlement and forgery are baseless.

        Normally in a proceeding under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., the accused is not permitted to introduce documents, which do not form part of the challan to show that no prima facie case is made out against him (State of Bihar and another etc. v. Shri P. Sharma and another etc. AIR 1991 SC 1260). But in the present case, the aforesaid documents relied on by the petitioner are official records of the Municipal Committee and, therefore correctness has not been questioned by the respondents. As such, it does not appear necessary to exclude such documents from consideration. However, even these documents only show that the T. V. and electrical goods were purchased in pursuance of valid resolutions but that by itself will not entitle the petitioner to the relief being claimed by him because the impugned order indicates that these facts also constructed the fabric of the prosecution case and the gist of the offence is that after purchasing these articles 101 the Municipal Committee out of Municipal funds the petitioners put them to his personal use. Whether he did so is a matter to be decided on evidence and, therefore, there is no justification for quashing the criminal proceedings against the petitioner. AIR 1991 SC 1260 distinguished.