P. K. MOHANTY, J. ( 1 ) THIS appeal is by the convict from the jail against the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar in T. R. No. 9 of 1988 (arising out of CBI/spe Bhubaneswar Case No. R. C. 10 of 1987 ). ( 2 ) THE prosecution case in short is that the accused while working as a Sub-Post Master in S. Rampur Sub-Post Office during the period from 1-3-1985 to 28-2-1986 had received a sum of Rs. 6,000/- on 12-3-1985 from R. N. Saraf, who had Savings Bank Account bearing No. 2330820 for depositing the same in his Savings Bank Account and made relevant entry in the pass book of the account holder and misappropriated the said amount without accounting for the same in the postal account maintained in S. Rampur S. P. O. One A. K. Sahu, who had a Savings Bank Account bearing No. 2331344 in S. Rampur S. P. O. had deposited a sum of Rs. 1,200/- on 7-6-1985 and a sum of Rs. 600/- on 16-10-1985 with the accused for depositing the same in his aforesaid Savings Bank Account and the accused after receiving the amount made necessary entries inthe respective pass book, but committed breach of trust in respect of that amount of Rs. 1,800/- without accounting for the same in the postal account maintained in S. Rampur S. P. O. The further allegation was that the accused had also misappropriated a sum of Rs. 20,000/- during the relevant period towards the sale proceeds in respect of four numbers of 6th Issue N. S. C. bearing Nos. F-936911, F-936912, F-936913, F-936914 and the accused failed either to hand over three more N. S. Cs. of 7th Issue bearing No. F-68975, F-68976 and F-68977 worth Rs. 15,000/- nor accounted for the sale proceeds in the official records and he also destroyed the N. S. C. Agent Receipt Book and N. S. C. application forms and N. S. C. Stock book and altogether the accused permanently misappropriated a sum of Rs. 42,800/-The accused denied the charges and pleaded innocence. In the accused statement, it is stated that after the Old Register showing stock of N. S. C. was exhausted, he opened a new Register where he had shown the stock of N. S. C. and he denied regarding the alleged misappropriation of a sum of Rs. 42,800/-The accused denied the charges and pleaded innocence. In the accused statement, it is stated that after the Old Register showing stock of N. S. C. was exhausted, he opened a new Register where he had shown the stock of N. S. C. and he denied regarding the alleged misappropriation of a sum of Rs. 42,800/- as alleged by the prosecution. ( 3 ) THE learned Special Judge found from the evidence on record that the accused was a public servant during the period 1-3-1985 to 28-3-1986. The prosecution has been able to prove entrustment of a sum of Rs. 27,800/- towards cash deposit in two Savings Bank Account and towards the sale-proceeds in respect of four numbers of N. S. C. 6th Issue. The prosecution has also proved that the accused had entrusted with the three numbers of N. S. C. worth Rs. 15,000/-, but he failed to account for the sale proceeds thereof nor handed over the same to his successor. ( 4 ) THE prosecution, to prove its case, had examined as many as 15 witnesses and two witnesses were examined on behalf of the defence. P. W. 1 Ramanarayan Saraf had a Savings Bank Account at Rampur Sub-Post Office, who had stated about the handing over of a sum of Rs. 6,000/- in cash to the accused who was the Sub-Post Master of the S. Rampur Sub-Post Office for crediting the same to his Savings Bank Account with the Pass Book (Ext. 1) and the accused made necessary entry in his Pass Book and returned the same to him after putting the date seal and his initial. P. W. 2 Asoka Kumar Sahu is another Savings Bank Account holder, who has testified that while he was serving as a Lecturer in English at Rampur College, he had opened a Savings Bank Account and on 7-6-1985, he had handed over a cash of Rs. 1200/- to the accused, who was then serving as the Sub-Post Master for depositing the same in his Savings Bank Account along with the Pass Book (Ext. 2 ). He further handed over a sum of Rs. 600/- on 16-10-1985 for depositing the same and the accused made necessary entry in the Pass Book and put the date seal and his initial. The Pass Book and necessary entries are Exts. 2, 2/1 and 2/2. 2 ). He further handed over a sum of Rs. 600/- on 16-10-1985 for depositing the same and the accused made necessary entry in the Pass Book and put the date seal and his initial. The Pass Book and necessary entries are Exts. 2, 2/1 and 2/2. P. W. 3 N. Barik had stated that at the instance of one Kausik Pradhan, a Postal Agent, he had purchased a National Savings Certificate for Rs. 5,000/- on 21-2-1986 and an amount of Rs. 5,000/- was deposited in S. Rampur Sub-Post Office through the postal agent Kausik Pradhan and the accused, as Sub-Post Master received the said sum and after receiving the money, the accused issued the National Savings Certificate for Rs. 5,000/ -. The National Savings Certificate purchased by him has been marked as Ext. 3. P. W. 4 Mahatma Prasad Bhoi deposed that he purchased three National Savings Certificates in the name of his three sons from S. Ramput Post Office through the postal agent Anirudha Saraf for Rs. 5,000/- each, marked Exts. 7, 8 and 9. P. W. 5 was a postal agent for N. S. C. for the year 1985-86, who disclosed that on 1-1-1986 he had received Rs. 5,000/- for purchasing N. S. C. in the name of Narendra Kumar Bhoi, son of Mahatma Prasad Bhoi (P. W. 4) and on 17-1-1986, he had received Rs. 10,000/- for purchase of N. S. Cs. in the names of Debendra and Bhupendra, sons of P. W. 4 and he paid Rs. 15,000/- to the accused, who was working as Sub-Post Master for purchase of the three National Savings Certificates in the names of three sons of P. W. 4 and the accused after receiving the money had given three N. S. Cs. marked Exts. 7, 8 and 9 for Rs. 5,000/- each. This witness has also proved the applications for purchase of National Savings Certificate and other documents. Similarly, P. W. 6, Kausik Pradhan, another agent has testified the purchase of National Savings Certificates. P. W. 7 was an Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Bolangir during the relevant period, who has stated that the allegation of misappropriation having been received, the accused was transferred, buthe did not join the new place of posting, for which steps were taken to trace out the accused. P. W. 7 was an Assistant Superintendent of Post Offices, Bolangir during the relevant period, who has stated that the allegation of misappropriation having been received, the accused was transferred, buthe did not join the new place of posting, for which steps were taken to trace out the accused. Subsequently, departmental proceeding was started against him and after enquiry, the accused was found guilty and was removed from service. P. W. 8 had prepared the National Savings Certificates for issue on receiving requisition from the accused and he testified all National Savings Certificates. This witness had proved the stock books of National Savings Certificates, which was maintained in the Bolangir Head Post Office, where he made entries showing the despatch of National Savings Certificates for Sub-Post Master of S. Rampur S. P. O. P. W. 9 is the successor of the accused, who took charge of the Accounts Book. P. W. 10 was working as the Complaint Inspector in the Office of Superintendent of Post Offices, Bolangir at the relevant point of time and subsequently as Sub-Divisional Inspector (Postal) during the relevant period and he had made inspection of the S. Rampur Sub-Post Office. P. Ws. 11 and 12 are the Sub-Post Masters and P. W. 13 was Sub-Divisional Inspector (Postal), East Sub-Division, Bolangir from 2-8-1986 to 9-8-1989, who has stated that he knows the accused Gopa Bariha, who was working as Sub-Post Master of S. Rampur S. P. O. , from July, 1984 to July, 1986 and during that period, it was a single handed Sub-Post Office. He was directed to make an enquiry and accordingly, he enquired into the allegations of misappropriation against the accused and submitted his report. P. W. 14 is another postal employee, who has testified that the accused was working as a Postal Assistant while he was working as Sub-Post Master in Dunguripali Sub-Post Office from 1980 to June, 1984. He has proved the entries made by the accused being acquainted with his hand-writing. ( 5 ) THE learned Special Judge, on a detailed analysis of the evidence on record, found that the accused, who was a public servant being employed as Sub-Post Master in S. Rampur Sub-Post Office in the district of Bolangir, had received a sum of Rs. 15,000/- and issued three National Savings Certificates of 7th Issue worth Rs. ( 5 ) THE learned Special Judge, on a detailed analysis of the evidence on record, found that the accused, who was a public servant being employed as Sub-Post Master in S. Rampur Sub-Post Office in the district of Bolangir, had received a sum of Rs. 15,000/- and issued three National Savings Certificates of 7th Issue worth Rs. 15,000/-, but could not account for the sale proceeds thereof and thus had misappropriated the said amount, inasmuch as the accused had received a sum of Rs. 7,800/- and granted acknowledgment of the same and made necessary entries in the respective Pass Books but he has failed to account for the aforesaid amount for necessary entries in the Account Books and other relevant records. The further finding is that the accused had received a sum of Rs. 20,000/- towards sale proceeds of four National Savings Certificates during the relevant period, but did not account for the said amount. The two witnesses examined by the defence did not throw any light in support of the defence case, but they only produced certain Post Office guide and Savings Bank Manual etc. Thus, on consideration of the evidence on record, the learned Special Judge has rightly come to the conclusion that the prosecution has been able to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the accused had misappropriated a sum of Rs. 42,800/- or converted the same for his own use and the prosecution has been able to establish the charges under S. 5 (2) read with S. 5 (1) (c) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 and Ss. 409 and 477-A, IPC against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and the plea of defence that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case could not be accepted in face of the materials produced by the prosecution. 409 and 477-A, IPC against the accused beyond all reasonable doubt and the plea of defence that the accused has been falsely implicated in this case could not be accepted in face of the materials produced by the prosecution. ( 6 ) SRI G. B. Das, learned counsel for the accused-appellant has fairly submitted that in view of the overwhelming materials on record and on a detailed discussion of the evidence, he would not challenge the findings of facts recorded by the learned Special Judge, but however, he submits that the present appeal is to be allowed on the ground that the prosecution having not obtained sanction from the appropriate authority, the Court below could not have taken cognizance of the offence and as such the entire proceeding is vitiated and, therefore, the order of conviction and sentence has to be set aside. It is the contention of the learned counsel that the learned Court below could not have taken cognizance of the offence without previous sanction of the competent authority, the accused-appellant being a public servant, as contemplated under S. 197, Cr. P. C. So far as the findings of facts are concerned, the learned counsel has rightly not challenged the findings of facts recorded by the learned Special Judge since it appears that the evidence advanced by each of the witnesses and the documents filed in support of the prosecution case have been discussed in the judgment and the learned Special Judge has rightly come to the conclusion that the accused is guilty ofthe offence alleged. Further, the submission of the learned counsel that in absence of a sanction under S. 197, Cr. P. C. the learned Court below could not have taken cognizance of the offence alleged needs consideration. ( 7 ) IN the case at hand, it is not in dispute that the appellant was dismissed from service since 21-8-1987. The charge-sheet in the case was submitted on 30-12-1987 and, the cognizance was taken on 3-6-1988 and therefore, on the date the charge-sheet was filed and the cognizance was taken, the accused-appellant undisputedly was not a public servant having been dismissed from service with effect from 21-8-1987. Now the question arises as to whether sanction as contemplated under S. 197, Cr. P. C. was necessary to be obtained and in absence whereof, the prosecution is vitiated. Now the question arises as to whether sanction as contemplated under S. 197, Cr. P. C. was necessary to be obtained and in absence whereof, the prosecution is vitiated. This point is no more res integra and has been settled by the Apex Court. In Kalicharan Mohapatra v. State of Orissa, AIR 1998 SC 2595 : (1998 Cri LJ 4003) the Apex Court held thus (at page 4006 of Cri LJ) :"a public servant who committed an offence mentioned in the Act, while he was a public servant, can be prosecuted with the sanction contemplated in S. 19 of the Act, if he continues to be a public servant when the Court takes cognizance of the offence. But if he ceases to be a public servant by that time, the Court can take cognizance of offence without any such sanction. In other words, the public servant who committed the offence while he was a public servant is liable to be prosecuted whether he continues in office or not at the time of trial or during the pendency of the prosecution. "in a recent decision State of Kerala v. Padmanabhan Nair, AIR 1999 SC 2405 : (1999 Cri LJ 3696) wherein the Hon'ble Apex Court has held thus :". . . an accused facing prosecution for offences under the P. C. Act cannot claim any immunity on the ground of want of sanction, if he ceased to be a public servant on the date when the Court took cognizance of the said offences. . . . . "in that view of the matter, the appellant having been dismissed from service from 21-8-1987, no sanction as contemplated under S. 19 of the P. C. Act or under S. 197 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was necessary to be taken since by the date the cognizance of the offence was taken and the charge-sheet was filed the appellant ceased to be a Government servant/public servant. ( 8 ) IN that view of the matter, keeping in view the findings of the Court below and the fact that on the date the cognizance of the offence was taken, the appellant was not a public servant, I do not find any reason to interfere in the order of conviction and sentence passed by the learned Special Judge, Bhubaneswar and accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. L. C. R. be transmitted to the lower Court immediately. L. C. R. be transmitted to the lower Court immediately. A free copy of the order be supplied to Mr. S. Mohanty, counsel for the respondent. Appeal dismissed.