P.N.Bakshi - (1.) THE applicant has been summoned under Sections 218/ 465/171 IPC on the basis of a charge- sheet submitted by the Crime Branch, C. I. D. on 4-2-1977. THE applicant was the Tax Officer, Zila Parisad, Muzaffarnagar. According to the charge sheet he had written out an order assessing the Firm Ashrad Ali Teb Ali Babar Ali, Gram Kithora Mirapur. Tahsil Jansath, district Muzaffarnagar to a tax of Rs. 1000/- for running a cane crusher for the year 1966-67 It was alleged that this judgment was changed and another judgment was pronounced by which the tax imposed was reduced to Rs. 500/- only and as such the assessee had been benefitted to the extent of Rs. 500/-,
(2.) AGGRIEVED by the submission of the charge-sheet the applicant has approached this Court by filing the instant application under Section 482 CrPC. I have heard counsel for the applicant as well as the counsel for the State. 1 have also perused the relevant affidavits. Even assuming that the judgment with regard to the imposition of the tax of Rs. 1000/- was written out by the applicant, which is not admitted by him, yet it is not the case of the prosecution that the said signed judgment had been pronounced. This alleged judgment is said to have been found in a torn condition. The ultimate judgment that was pronounced imposed a tax of Rs. 500/-. There can be no doubt that unless a judgment is pronounced and signed, it does not become final. Admittedly the alleged torn judgment had not been pronounced, and, therefore, no finality attaches to it. It was open to the Assessing Officer to have changed his mind till the last moment when the judgment was finally pronounced and signed. There is no allegation that the applicant had accepted illegal gratification or was otherwise benefitted by the change of the judgment. In these circumstances even if the allegations mentioned in the charge-sheet are taken to be correct, no case has been made out against the applicant. It is further noticeable that the offence is alleged to have taken place on 31st March 1968. The instant prosecution is being launched against the applicant as late as 4th February 1977, after a lapse of nine years The applicant's allegation is that this complaint has been filed due to party politics. Be that as it may, the fact remains that the charge sheet framed by the C. I. D. is extremely belated one and it is not in the interest of justice to prosecute the applicant now after such a long lapse.
(3.) FOR the reasons given above, this application under Section 482 CrPC is allowed. The proceedings in Criminal case No. 879/9 of 1977 in the court of the Judicial Magistrate Jansath, district Muzaffarnagar, on the basis of the charge-sheet dated 4-2-1977 are hereby quashed. Application allowed.;