H.S.BEDI, J. - (1.) ACCUSED Malkiat Singh, who was a Salesman in the Co- operative Agricultural Service Society, was brought to trial for offences punishable under Sections 408, 468, 471 and 474 of the Indian Penal Code for having defrauded his employer after having mis-appropriated fertiliser worth Rs. 69,227.40 and for having forged the record. The trial Court vide its judgment dated 28.2.1989 convicted the accused for the offences for which he stood charged and sentenced him to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year to pay a fine of Rs. 1000/- and in default of payment of fine, to undergo further rigorous imprisonment for three months. Malkiat Singh then filed an appeal before the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda, who vide his judgment dated 6.4.1990 allowed the same and acquitted him on the short ground that as the dispute between Malkiat Singh and his employer was subject to Arbitration under Sections 54 and 55 of the Punjab Co-operatives Societies Act and as arbitration proceedings had in fact been initiated against the accused, the continuance of criminal proceedings amounted to an abuse of the process of the court and could not be maintained under the law in view of the judgments reported as Kashmira Singh v. State of Punjab, 1989(1) RCR(Cr) 175 (P&H) : 1989(1) Chandigarh Law Reporter 413 and Gurcharan Singh v. State of Punjab, 1989(1) RCR(Cr) 331 (P&H) : 1989(2) Chandigarh Law Reporter 35.
(2.) THE present appeal has been filed by the State of Punjab impugning the judgment of the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bhatinda. Mr. G.S. Gill, the learned Sr. Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has argued that in the light of judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.W. Palanitkar and others v. State of Bihar and another, 2001(4) RCR(Cr.) 572 (SC) : AIR 2001 Supreme Court 2960, it cannot now be said that the judgments aforesaid laid down the correct law. He has emphasised that arbitration proceedings under Sections 54 and 55 of the Co-operative Societies Act were for the recovery of the amount embezzled whereas criminal proceedings were for seeking punishment for breach of trust and forgery etc. and both the proceedings being mutually exclusive in effect, could continue simultaneously.
(3.) MR . T.S. Sangha, the learned counsel for the accused has, however, argued that as the prosecution had been continuing over years and he had also participated in the arbitration proceedings, he should be released on probation by this Court.;