Panchayat chief escapes, but not part-time clerk

March 18, 2012 02:25 pm | Updated 02:25 pm IST - MADURAI

In a bizarre incident, the Madras High Court Bench here has ordered discharge of a former panchayat president from a criminal case registered against him on the charge of embezzling public money, but directed the police to continue the prosecution with respect to the second accused who served as a part-time clerk in the local body at the relevant point of time.

Justice P.R. Shivakumar discharged Mariappan of Virudhunagar on the ground that the District Crime Branch police had failed to obtain sanction from the government, as required under Section 230 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayat Act, before prosecuting a panchayat president.

However, no such sanction was required with respect to the part-time clerk, Nagarajan.

According to the accused, the police had registered the case against them on charges of embezzling public money by preparing bogus bills. They were booked under Sections 409 (criminal breach of trust by public servant) and 420 (cheating) of the Indian Penal Code.

The case was registered in February, 2006, on the basis of orders passed by the then Collector.

After investigation, the DCB police filed a final report against both the accused before the trial court. But the report was not filed along with government sanction for prosecution.

Hence, the accused filed a petition before the lower court itself seeking to discharge them from the case under Section 239 (power conferred on Magistrates to discharge accused) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

The Judicial Magistrate II in Virudhunagar dismissed the discharge petition on July 29 last year on the ground that the absence of government sanction could be considered only at the end of the trial.

Challenging the dismissal, the petitioners contended that prosecuting them without sanction amounted to an unethical and illogical move as they were deprived of their crucial right.

Finding some force and substance in the argument, Mr. Justice Shivakumar said that the first accused alone could be given the benefit of discharge by invoking Section 230 of the Tamil Nadu Panchayats Act without affecting the prosecution of the second accused.

0 / 0
Sign in to unlock member-only benefits!
  • Access 10 free stories every month
  • Save stories to read later
  • Access to comment on every story
  • Sign-up/manage your newsletter subscriptions with a single click
  • Get notified by email for early access to discounts & offers on our products
Sign in

Comments

Comments have to be in English, and in full sentences. They cannot be abusive or personal. Please abide by our community guidelines for posting your comments.

We have migrated to a new commenting platform. If you are already a registered user of The Hindu and logged in, you may continue to engage with our articles. If you do not have an account please register and login to post comments. Users can access their older comments by logging into their accounts on Vuukle.