The High Court dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of a forged document case, holding that allegations of forgery are matters for trial, not quashing. It granted one week for a bail application.
Notice papers of the petitioner dismissed; the petitioner is granted one week's time.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 10 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1074 of 2020 Applicant :- Mayank Bajpai Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Through S.P. Cbi/Acb Lko. Counsel for Applicant :- Purnendu Chakravarty,Yashonidhi Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- A.S.G. Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Present petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking following prayers:-
2. A large number of housing loans were sanctioned by UCO Bank, Kakadeo Branch, Kanpur. Loans were not repaid and in the investigation, it was found that the loans were obtained by submitting forged and fabricated documents including I.T.Rs. One loan amount was sanctioned through the petitioner, brother of the Manager of the said Branch for an amount of Rs.20,00,000/-
3. Allegation against the petitioner is that he being a panel advocate prepared forged documents in respect of the property which was allegedly purchased, on the basis of forged documents i.e. ITRs etc., Bank processed loan of Yogendra Kumar Pandey. Yogendra Kumar Pandey did not repay the said loan and the account got declared as Non Performing Asset.
4. Central Bureau of Investigation in its investigation found that home loan of Rs.20,00,000/- for purchase of Ready Built House was applied by Mr. Yogendra Kumar Pandey. This house was to be purchased from Neelam Chatterji w/o Utpal Chatterjee R/o 120/521-A, Shivaji Nagar, Kanpur. Loan was processed and recommended by Anshuman Mishra, then Branch Head, and it was sanctioned by M.K. Pandey, brother of Yogendra Kumar Pandey then Branch Head on 30.08.2014.
5. Investigation further revealed that after disbursement of the home loan, a demand draft of Rs.20,00,000/- was issued in favour of Sanjay Srivastava, which was deposited by him in his Savings Account. For sanction of the housing loan, agreement for sale was executed on 22.08.2014. Yogendra Kumar Pandey submitted forged KYC i.e. Voter ID card and forged proof of income i.e. ITRs. The petitioner being an empaneled advocate, submitted false and bogus report of Arazi land and also mentioned in his report that the property was fit for mortgage. Neelam Chaterjee executed a Power of Attorney in favour of Sanjay Srivastava on 29.08.2014. Execution of Power of Attorney after execution of sale agreement on 22.08.2014 would itself show fraud and conspiracy for committing the offence cheating the Bank for Rs.20,00,000/-.
6. Mr.Purnendu Chakravarty, learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Bank used later head of the accused-applicant. He has never submitted any report in his hand writing. Signatures on the later head are not his and they are forged.
7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submits that the petitioner has cooperated in the investigation, and he is an Advocate and there is no chance of avoiding process of the Court, if he is enlarged on bail.
These aspects shall be considered by the trial court at an appropriate stage.
8. The crucial test for quashing of the proceedings/complaint is that whether mere reading/perusal of the complaint/FIR cognizance offence is disclosed or not. If one reads the charge-sheet, allegation against the petitioner discloses prima facie offence. Whether the petitioner's signatures were forged or he submitted the forged or bogus report, it is a matter of trial but same cannot be considered while considering the petition for quashing of the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. In view thereof, I do not find any ground to quash impugned proceedings.
9. The petition is dismissed .
10. The petitioner is granted one week's time to apply for anticipatory bail/regular bail, as the case may be, and the trial court should consider bail application in accordance with law.
( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J. )
Digitally signed by PRATEEK Order Date :- 30.11.2022/prateek ARORA Date: 2022.12.01 09:55:36 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the proceedings under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be quashed for forgery in advance income tax reports and property documents.
Whether submission of a forged land report by a panel advocate establishes a ground for quashing criminal proceedings.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Mayank Bajpai
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
