TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (9) TMI 1713
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....trate, First Class, Arvi, whereby an application for discharge filed on behalf of the applicant, was dismissed. 03] On 26.10.2021, this Court had passed an order permitting amendment of the application for adding the aforesaid prayer, despite objection raised on behalf of the non-applicant No.1/State, by referring to the judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. When this application was finally heard, the said objection was reiterated on behalf of the non-applicant No.1/State, as well as the non-applicant No.2 i.e. informant - complainant. 04] The sequence of events, leading to filing of the F.I.R. and initiation of criminal proceedings is that, the applicant at the relevant date was working as the Depot Manager of the Maharashtra State Road Transport Corporation (hereinafter referred to as "the Corporation"). On 07.03.2013, overwriting was allegedly noticed in a register maintained for diesel filled in the buses of the Corporation, as well as receipts issued by a private petrol pump from which the diesel was filled, as per an agreement between the Corporation and the Petrol Pump. It was alleged that when the Accountant of the Corporation noticed such overwriting and found....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Chief Storage Officer had also recorded statements of the concerned employees. It was found that two employees i.e. one Mr. Wahane and other Mr. Talekar, who were questioned, had stated one version to the Security and Vigilance Officer and another to the other Officer. During the course of enquiry by the Enquiry Officer, when the said employees were confronted with the conflicting statements, they were unable to give a proper explanation. It was also found that the co-accused Mr. Belge had stated before the Security and Vigilance Officer that the overwriting and tampering with the register and the receipts, was undertaken on the direction of the applicant, but before the Enquiry Officer, the said co-accused stated that the aforesaid statements were made due to the pressure exerted by the Security and Vigilance Officer. 09] The Enquiry Officer in the said report eventually found that the said employees Mr. Wahane and Mr. Talekar had prepared the fabricated bills and entries in the register by overwriting, due to which penalty of withholding of increments was imposed on them. Insofar as the applicant was concerned, it was found that the material on record demonstrated that the app....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tandard of proof in criminal cases is much higher. Reliance was placed on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashoo Surendranath Tewari Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police, EOW, CBI and another reported in (2020) 9 SCC 636, as well as judgment of this Court in the case of Sanjay s/o. Laxman Kholapurkar Vs. State of Maharashtra reported in 2021 ALL MR (Cri) 3808. 13] It was further submitted on behalf of the applicant that none of the ingredients of the offences alleged against the applicant were even prima facie made out by the material on record and therefore, the F.I.R. as well as the charge-sheet deserved to be quashed and set aside. In this regard, reliance was placed on judgments of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Sheila Sebastian Vs. R. Jawaharraj and another Etc. reported in AIR 2018 SC 2434 and Mohammed Ibrahim and others Vs. State of Bihar and another reported in (2009) 8 SCC 751. 14] It was further submitted that this Court has extraordinary power under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. to grant relief to the applicant in the facts and circumstances of the present case. Reliance was placed on judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....it that in the facts of the present case concerning allegations of fabrication of the record, sanction for prosecution was not necessary. On this basis, it was submitted that the application deserved to be dismissed. 17] Heard learned counsel appearing for the rival parties and perused the material on record. It is necessary to first deal with the preliminary objection raised on behalf of the non- applicants that the present application deserves to be dismissed, for the reason that the applicant had already applied for discharge and the application was dismissed by the Magistrate. According to the learned counsel for the non-applicants, the only remedy available to the applicant in this situation, was to file an appropriate revision application before this Court. To answer the said contention, the applicant has relied upon judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Prabhu Chawla Vs. State of Rajasthan and another (supra). In the said judgment, the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held that availability of alternative remedy of revision under Section 397 of the Cr. P.C. cannot by itself be a ground to dismiss the application filed under Section 482 of the Cr. P.C. In t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deed amount to an abuse of the process of the law. 19] In order to buttress the aforesaid contention, the applicant has relied upon the position of law, clarified by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ashoo Surendranath Tewari Vs. Deputy Superintendent of Police, EOW, CBI and another (supra). It has been held therein that exoneration in a departmental enquiry on same set of allegations ought to result in terminating the criminal proceedings initiated against the accused person. The basis of the said position of law is that the standard of proof in a criminal proceeding, on the touchstone of proof beyond reasonable doubt, is much higher than the lower standard of proof in a departmental enquiry, which is based on preponderance of probabilities. The position of law in that regard was clarified in the judgment in the case of Radheshyam Kejriwal Vs. State of West Bengal reported in (2011) 3 SCC 581, wherein it was held as under: "38. The ratio which can be culled out from these decisions can broadly be stated as follows: (i) Adjudication proceedings and criminal prosecution can be launched simultaneously; (ii) Decision in adjudication proceedings....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....BI and another (supra), applies in favour of the applicant. In order to examine the said contention, it would be necessary to refer to the findings of the Enquiry Officer in the aforesaid enquiry report, forwarded to the applicant alongwith letter dated 14.08.2014. We find that the charge-sheet dated 18.12.2013, indeed levelled allegations against the applicant, akin to the allegations made in the report, leading to the registration of the aforesaid F.I.R. In the departmental enquiry, statements of employees of the Corporation were recorded and it was found that the applicant could not be held guilty of the charges, as the alleged overwriting and fabrications, could not be attributable to the applicant, or even on the direction of the applicant. It was found that the co- accused Mr. Belge specifically stated that the Security and Vigilance Officer, who had initially enquired into the matter, had exerted pressure on the co-accused to falsely implicate the applicant. It was found that in such circumstances, at worst, the applicant could be said to have been negligent in supervising the functioning of his sub-ordinates, while he was working as the Depot Manager of the Corporation, whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the petrol pump i.e. the other co-accused person, is found to be in contradiction to the statement of the very same person in the departmental enquiry, where he stated that the aforesaid allegation was made against the applicant under the threat given by the Security and Vigilance Officer. It is significant that the F.I.R. stood registered after a delay of about 9 months at the behest of the same Security and Vigilance Officer. Therefore, the entire material available alongwith the charge-sheet, including the statements of the witnesses even prima facie does not indicate involvement of the applicant. 25] Insofar as ingredients of the offences are concerned, the allegation pertaining to Section 468 of the I.P.C. regarding forgery needs to be appreciated in the backdrop of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in that regard. In the case of Sheila Sebastian Vs. R. Jawaharraj and another Etc. (supra), the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the context of the offence of forgery held as follows: "19. A close scrutiny of the aforesaid provisions makes it clear that, Section 463 defines the offence of forgery, while Section 464 substantiates the same by providing an....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r. Belge, when compared with his specific statement made in the departmental enquiry, shows that according to him, the Security and Vigilance Officer had threatened and coerced him to make such statements against the applicant. Therefore, this Court is convinced that even prima facie the allegations made against the applicant do not disclose the ingredients of the said offence, on the basis of the material placed on record with the charge-sheet. 28] As regards the contention pertaining to absence of sanction, this Court agrees with the submission made on behalf of the non-applicants that when fabrication and misappropriation of funds by a public servant are involved, sanction for prosecution may not be necessary, because such acts cannot be said to be acts done as part of the official duty, as held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the Shambhoo Nath Misra Vs. State of U.P. and others (supra). But, the question of sanction pales into insignificance, in view of the above conclusion that we have arrived at, to the effect that exoneration of the applicant in the departmental enquiry for virtually the same allegations ought to lead to termination of the criminal proceedings. To per....