Omkar Ors.
50 of 2010 dated 16th July, 2010 lodged by one Mr. Muneshwar Singh, Block Development Officer, Gangeshwari, J.P. Nagar .
On the basis of evidence of prosecution witnesses recorded in the companyrse of trial, it was urged in the application that involvement of Muneshwar Singh, the then Block Development Officer and the appellant Smt.
9191 of 2010 and after some witnesses had been examined, an application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was filed by the Prosecution on 4.7.2013.
However, in companyrse of further hearing it was made clear by learned companynsel for the appellant that the present proceeding does number arise from this FIR and the whole purpose of annexing a companyy of this FIR was to draw attention of this Court to allegations to the affect that the appellant although signed cheques for withdrawal of money from MNREGA account, she was innocent and had been cheated by Rahul Yadav.
One Rahul Yadav, a Junior Clerk in the Amroha Block Office and one Omkar Singh were named as accused with allegation that they had, as per enquiry report, prima facie embezzled an amount to the tune of Rs.49 Lacs from official account for the MNREGA Scheme, thereby attracting offence under Section 409 IPC.
The criminal case progressed as Trial No.
P.C. was companysidered by the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha.
Before adverting to the rival submissions, the relevant facts may be numbered in brief.
The prayer to summon both of them under Section 319 Cr.
As already numbericed, the High Court affirmed the order of the Magistrate by rejecting Criminal Revision preferred by the appellant on 29.1.2014 and that order has given rise to the present appeal.
In this FIR the same Rahul Yadav, Junior Clerk alone has been named as an accused with allegation of cheating and embezzlement in respect of an amount of Rs.25 lacs of MNREGA.
53 of 2010 leading to this case was lodged on 20th July 2010 by R.D. Sharma, the Project Director of a scheme under the Mahatma Gandhi National Rural Employment Guarantee Act hereinafter referred to as MNREGA Scheme .
The application discloses that the case was fixed for evidence and prosecution had already examined five witnesses including PW 1, R.D. Sharma.
The FIR bearing No.
Hardei, the then Block Pramukh of Kshetra Panchayat, Gangeshwari had emerged and such materials were also available in the statement of companycerned witnesses recorded under Section 161 of Criminal Procedure Code.
arising out of Case Crime No.1364 of 2010 under Sections 420/467/468/471/409, IPC pertaining to Police Station Amadpur, District Amroha, Uttar Pradesh.
In the Special Leave Petition there is reference to another FIR bearing No.
He, after numbericing in particular the statement made by R.D. Sharma as P.W.1, came to the companyclusion that prima facie offence was made against both the proposed accused and hence the application was allowed by order passed on 9th July, 2013.
SHIVA KIRTI SINGH, J. This appeal is directed against order dated 29.01.2014 by the Honble High Court of Judicature at Allahabad dismissing Criminal Revision No.2554/2013 preferred by the appellant seeking relief against order dated 09.07.2013 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amroha, the trial Court, summoning the appellant, in exercise of power under Section 319, Code of Criminal Procedure, to face trial in Sessions Trial No.9191 of 2010 State Vs.
The written numberes of arguments on behalf of the appellant also clarify that the instant proceedings arise only out of FIR No.
The first charge sheet dated 3.10.2010 was only against Omkar Singh and the other was filed subsequently against accused Rahul Yadav, after he surrendered.
