Criminal Revision No.2182 of 2005

1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH

Criminal Revision No.2182 of 2005.

Date of Decision : 17.3.2011.

Baljeet Singh

...... Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...... Respondent

CORAM :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE NAWAB SINGH

Present:

Mr. L.S. Sidhu, Advocate,

for the petitioner.

Mr. Satyavir Yadav, DAG, Haryana,

for the respondent-State.

NAWAB SINGH J.(ORAL)

This revision arises out of the following facts:-

Baljeet Singh-Cashier-petitioner, Jai Parkash-

Assistant Accountant, Phul Kumar-Assistant Accountant and Sahi

Kumar-Manager were employees of the Chika Cooperative

Marketing-cum-Processing Society Limited, Chika (hereinafter

referred to as 'the Society') in the year 1995. Vide vouchers (Exhibits

P-1 and P-3) amounts of Rs.12000/- and Rs.11,000/- were withdrawn

under the signatures of Baljeet Singh-petitioner, Jai Parkash and

Sahi Ram for paying fee to Phul Kumar for contesting cases filed by

retrenched employees against the Society before Registrar

Cooperative Society Haryana, Chandigarh and the High Court. Vide

voucher (Exhibit P-2), an amount of Rs.4006/- was withdrawn under

the signatures of the aforesaid three employees of the Society for

making payment to Ram Dhari as salary for the month of March,

1995. Thus, the total amount withdrawn was Rs.27,006/-. In the year,

1997 Prem Chand-Inspector, Cooperative Society found that the

amount was misappropriated by the aforesaid four employees of the

Society. On his request, Ram Kumar Dahiya (PW-6) the then

Assistant Registrar Cooperative Society, Kaithal made complaint

Criminal Revision No.2182 of 2005

2

(Exhibit PW-7/A) to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Kaithal and

on the basis of the same, First Information Report (Exhibit PW-5/A)

was recorded by Lajja Ram, Assistant Sub-Inspector (PW-5).

2.

On completion of investigation, Baljeet Singh, Jai

Parkash, Phul Kumar and Sahi Ram were charged for offences

punishable under Sections 408 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code and

as they pleaded not guilty, they were brought to trial.

3.

Prosecution in support of their case examined,

Gurmail Singh, Assistant Manager (PW-1), Ram Dhari, Assistant

Manager (PW-2), Ramphal, Assistant Accountant (PW-3), Roop

Chand, Clerk (PW-4), Lajja Ram, Assistant Sub-Inspector (PW-5),

Ram Kumar Dahiya, Assistant Registrar (PW-6) and Mahinder Pal

Assistant Sub Inspector (PW-7).

4.

In the statement recorded under Section 313 of

Code of Criminal Procedure, the accused denied their complicity with

the offence in question and pleaded innocence.

5.

Judicial Magistrate First Class, Guhla by judgment

of conviction dated October 20^th, 2001 convicted all the accused

under Sections 408 and 120-B of Indian Penal Code and by order of

sentence dated October 22^nd, 2001 sentenced them to undergo

rigorous imprisonment for a period of two years and to pay fine of

Rs.500/- on both counts with default stipulation. The sentences were

ordered to run concurrently.

6.

Aggrieved of the same, the accused preferred

appeals before Sessions Judge, Kaithal. By judgment dated

November 23^rd, 2005, Sessions Judge, Kaithal dismissed the appeal

filed by Baljeet Singh-petitioner and acquitted the remaining three

accused viz. Jai Parkash, Phul Kumar and Sahi Ram on the short

ground that in the arbitration proceedings, these three employees of

the Society were exonerated but Baljeet Singh did contest the

proceedings before the Arbitrator. Hence, the present revision has

been filed by Baljit Singh.

7.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has assailed the

judgments of the Courts below on the ground that from the evidence

Criminal Revision No.2182 of 2005

3

led by the prosecution, it is proved to the hilt that petitioner did not

withdraw the amount from the Bank and the entire record was

countersigned by the Assistant Manager, Assistant Account and the

Manager of the Society. This