- (1.) Connect with the Applications u/s 482 CrPC no. 20900 and 24074 both of 2015. Heard Sri Amit Daga, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri Avnish Kumar Srivastava, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 and the learned A.G.A. This application u/s 482 is preferred against the orders dated 26.7.2014 and 8.5.2015 rejecting the discharge under Section 239 CrPC for offences under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409 and 120-B IPC. The prosecution case in a nutshell is that the applicant along with other co-accused persons in the connected applications misappropriated a sum of Rs.9 lacs disbursed by the UGC for construction of a women's hostel.
(2.) It is submitted that it is not disputed that Rs.9 lacs in two instalments of Rs.7.50 lacs + Rs. 1.50 lac was credited by the UGC by way of demand draft in favour of Sri Saligram Sharma Smarak P.G. College, Rasna, Meerut to be operated under the joint account of the applicant as the Principal and the Secretary of the college, i.e, the amount was not deposited in the personal account of the applicant. It is also submitted that the applicant in his statement did not deny the issuance of a completion certificate dated 30.3.2004, which also bore the signatures of the Assistant Engineer concerned, i.e. Sabahuddin Mushtaq, co-accused in the connected application, thus it cannot be alleged that any forgery or fabrication was done, so as to constitute an offence under Sections 467/ 471 IPC. Learned counsel for the applicant in this connection placed reliance on Mohammad Imbrahim vs. State of Bihar, 2009 8 SCC 751 . It is further submitted that the college on 7.3.2002 had sent a progress report along with an audit report to the UGC stating utilization of Rs.8,55,969/- and Rs.7.50 lac released by UGC had been utilized and after being satisfied with the audit report, the UGC released an additional sum of Rs.1.5 lac vide D.D. Dated 11.3.2003. It is thus submitted on available materials that in the instant case, neither any wrongful gain has been caused to the applicant, nor a wrongful loss to the College, so as to constitute an offence u/s 406, 420 IPC and at the best it is a case of non-completion of the hostel building within a stipulated period, as it is not the case of the prosecution that there does not exist any such building. Finally learned counsel claims parity with the order passed in the connected applications.
(3.) Learned A.G.A. and learned counsel for O.P. no.2 have opposed the submission. The matter requires consideration. Both learned counsel for the O.P. no.2 and learned A.G.A. are granted a month's time to file counter affidavit. Rejoinder, if any, within two weeks thereafter. List thereafter. Meanwhile, further proceedings of Criminal Case No. 1499 of 2012, State of U.P. Vs. Nand Kumar and others, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 406, 409 and 120B IPC, P.S. Saroorpur, District Meerut, pending before the Court of Special Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut, shall remain stayed as against the applicants.;