IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 04TH DAY OF APRIL, 2019 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JOHN MICHAEL CUNHA CRIMINAL PETITION NO.4158 OF 2013 BETWEEN:
1. K K POONACHA S/O KARYAPPA AGED ABOUT 47 YEARS PANCHAYAT SECRETARY KIRAGANDOORU GRAMA PANCHAYAT R/O BAADAGA BAANOMGALA VILLAGE, VIRAJPET TALUK-571218.
2. H B MOHANA S/O BHYRAIAH AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS BILL COLLECTOR OF KIRAGANDOORU GRAMA PANCHAYAT, RESIDENT OF TAAKERI VILLAGE SOMWARPET-571236. ... PETITIONERS (BY SRI: N J KUMAR & SRI: VEERESHA KUMAR S.S., ADVOCATES) AND 1. STATE BY SOMWARPET POLICE STATION REPRESENTED BY SPP HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA BANGALORE-560001 2. BELLIAPPA S/O. MADAPPA, PRESIDENT OF KIRAGANDOORU GRAMA PANCHAYAT RESIDENT OF BELEGERE VILLAGE, SOMWARPET-571236. ... RESPONDENTS (BY SRI: VIJAYA KUMAR MAJAGE, ADDL SPP FOR R1; SRI: S.P.SATHISH, ADVOCATE FOR R2-ABSENT) THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 OF CR.P.C. PRAYING TO QUASH THE PROCEEDINGS IN C.C.NO.705/2012 ARISING OUT OF CR. NO.244/2010 OF RESPONDENT POLICE AND PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE C.J. (JR. DN.) AND J.M.F.C., SOMWARPET.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
O R D E R Petitioner No.1 was working as Panchayath Secretary and Petitioner No.2 was working as Bill Collector in Kiragandooru Gram Panchayath. The President of the said Panchayath lodged a complaint against the petitioners alleging that during their tenure, by manipulating the records, the petitioners misappropriated the funds of the panchayath. Based on the said complaint, FIR is registered against the petitioners under Sections 420, 408, 468, 470 r/w Section 34 of Indian Penal Code. Consequent to the investigation, charge sheet is also laid against the petitioners for the above offences.
2. The only contention urged by the learned counsel for petitioners is that the petitioners herein being public servants and the alleged offences having been committed in discharge of their duties, prosecution of the petitioners without prior sanction under section 197 of Cr.P.C. vitiates the entire proceedings and therefore, the impugned proceedings are liable to be quashed.
3. Learned Additional State Public Prosecutor, however, disputes the submissions. He contends that apart from the allegations of misappropriation there are specific charges of falsification of records. The said acts cannot be considered as acts committed in discharge of duties of a public servant and hence, in the fact situation of the case, no prior sanction is necessary for the prosecution of the petitioners.
4. In the light of the contention urged by the parties, the only point that arise for consideration is “Whether in the fact situation of the case, prosecution of petitioners without prior sanction under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. is legally tenable?”.
5. The specific charge against the petitioners is that while serving as Panchayath Secretary and Bill Collector, the petitioners herein collected a sum of Rs.5,524/- towards house tax for the year 2009-2010 and drew up the original receipt for Rs.5524/-. However, in the counterfoil the amount was mentioned as Rs.250/-. Likewise, they collected a sum of Rs.35,968/- for issuance of building licence on 29.4.2010 and issued the original receipt for Rs.35,968/-, but in the counterfoil the amount was shown as Rs.1720/-. Likewise, they collected another sum of Rs.34,248/- and without crediting the said amount to the Panchayath account, misappropriated the said amount.
6. From the above averments it is clear that the petitioners are sought to be prosecuted on the specific accusations of creating false documents with intent to misappropriate the public funds. It is not only a case of misappropriation, but also falsification of public records. The said acts of the petitioners cannot be construed as the acts committed in the discharge of official duties. The said acts has no nexus with the official duty performed by the petitioners.
7. In that view of the matter, I am of the opinion that the acts alleged against the petitioners do not get protection under Section 197 of Cr.P.C. Consequently, I do not find any reason to interfere with the impugned proceedings under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. As a result, petition is dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE bkp