Research › Search › Judgment

Uttarakhand High Court · body

2001 DIGILAW 203 (UTT)

Harish Chandra Aggarwal v. State of Uttaranchal

2001-10-17

M.C.JAIN

body2001
JUDGMENT M. C. Jain, J. : Heard Sri Ashok Agarwal, learned counsel for the petitioner and Sri S. S. Adhikari on behalf of the State. 2. The petitioner is facing trial in case crime No. 168 of 2001 under Sections 409, 420, 469 and 471 I.P.C. in the Court of Judicial Magistrate, IInd, Dehradun. He is aggrieved by the order dated 13.8.2001 passed by the Magistrate concerned rejecting his application under Section 239, Cr.P.C. for his discharge and by order dated 25.9.2000 passed by the revisional Court dismissing his revision there-against. The petitioner was Cashier in Dehradun Dugdh Utpadak Sahkari Sangh. On two dates, two amount or Rs. 5,000/- were deposited in bank accounts of Dugdha Utpadak Sahkari Sangh, but in fact the deposit was done of Rs. 75,000/- by interpolating counter foils of the deposit receipts by putting the digit of '2' before' digit of '5' in one and adding '0' after the figure of 5000/- in another. According to the applicant, he was out of station to Haldwani on the relevant date and interpolation in the counter foils of the receipts of deposit had been made by the Assistant Accountant Dharam Pal. It is not disputed that the charge of cash was with the petitioner, he being the cashier. The charge-sheet had been submitted against the applicant after investigation . 3. Earlier to the submission of the charge-sheet by order dated 12.7.2000, Division Bench of Allahabad High Court had stayed the arrest of the applicant till the submission of the charge-sheet. It is a fact that the petitioner neither surrendered before the Court concerned 'after submission of the charge-sheet nor applied for bail. As. such application under Section 239, Cr. P. C. by him was not even maintainable when he was not submitting to the legal machinery. 4. Even otherwise, appreciating the matter on facts, there was no merit in application under Section 239, Cr. P.c. The same has rightly been rejected where against the revision has also justifiably been dismissed. 5. The petition before this Court under Section 482, Cr. P. C. is without substance and is hereby dismissed. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has also retired from service and is aged person. P.c. The same has rightly been rejected where against the revision has also justifiably been dismissed. 5. The petition before this Court under Section 482, Cr. P. C. is without substance and is hereby dismissed. 6. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that he has also retired from service and is aged person. Keeping this in view, it is provided that in case the applicant surrenders before the concerned Magistrate and applies for bail, his bail plea shall be considered according to law expeditiously.