Crl. Rev. No. 2894 of 2010 (O&M) [ 1 ] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA, CHANDIGARH Crl. Rev. No. 2894 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: 1.6.2011 Atma Nand ..................................................... Petitioner Versus State of Haryana ........................................ Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Ms. Justice Ritu Bahri 1.To be referred to the Reporters or not? 2. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest? Present: Mr. S.P.Chahar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, AAG, Haryana. ... RITU BAHRI, J. (Oral) Challenge in this petition is to the judgment dated 27.8.2010 passed by the learned Appellate Court vide which the appeal has been dismissed against judgment dated 10.8.2006. The petitioner has been convicted under Section 409 IPC and is sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for three years and to pay a fine of `5,000/- and in default of payment of fine to further undergo simple imprisonment for three months. Crl. Rev. No. 2894 of 2010 (O&M) [ 2 ] The petitioner was employed as Regional Assistant in the Haryana Forest Department Corporation and was Incharge of Sales Depot, Gangesar (Gohana). The petitioner is alleged to have misappropriated the wood of Sale Depot, Gangesar. It is alleged that he has misappropriated 85 cubic meters round eucalyptus timber, 81 cubic meters round eucalyptus timber and 800 cubic meters eucalyptus pulp wood by forging the record. The market price of the same is more than `5 lacs. Counsel for the petitioner has argued that no sanction for prosecution of the petitioner was taken in terms of Section 197 Cr.P.C. Petitioner is a Class-III employee and he could not be removed from office save by or with the sanction of Government who is accused of any offence alleged to have been committed by him while acting or purporting to act in the discharge of his official duties. Admittedly, no sanction has been given. It has not been shown that failure of justice has been occasioned by taking cognizance of the case by the Court without the previous sanction of the Government. No ground for interference in the impugned order is made out. Criminal revision is dismissed. Counsel for the petitioner has sought that a lenient view be taken for the quantum of sentence. The petitioner has rendered 30 years of service and is not a previous Crl. Rev. No. 2894 of 2010 (O&M) [ 3 ] convict. Mr. Kshitij Sharma, counsel for the State, has placed on record the Custody Certificate which shows that the petitioner has undergone more than 9 months till date in custody. He has informed the Court that as per instructions dated 18.6.2005 from the Regional Manager, Haryana Forest Development Corporation Ltd., Rohtak, the petitioner has since been dismissed from service. Total recoveries due from the petitioner comes to `10,40,768/-. These recoveries relate to six complaints against the petitioner. Vide letter dated 27.5.2005 the Collector, Bhiwani, has intimated to the Haryana Forest Development Corporation that it is not possible to effect the recovery from the defaulting officials. The petitioner has been facing the trial since the year 1996 and keeping in view that he has undergone 9 months of actual sentence, It is directed that he be released on probation for a period of two years to the satisfaction of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Sonepat. 1.6.2011 ( RITU BAHRI ) Rupi JUDGE