The High Court quashed an FIR against a bank manager for cheating and atrocities. The Court held that mere denial of a loan did not constitute the alleged offenses, and the FIR was an abuse of process.
The impugned FIR C.R. No. I 45/2010 is quashed and set aside so far as the applicant is concerned.
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.
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
CRIMINAL MISC.APPLICATION (FOR QUASHING & SET ASIDE FIR/ORDER) NO. 5329 of 2010
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
======================================
====================================== R K SINGHAL, SENIOR MANAGER,....Applicant(s)
Versus
STATE OF GUJARAT & 1....Respondent(s)
======================================
Appearance:
MR JD AJMERA, ADVOCATE for the Applicant(s) No. 1 MR MB RANA, ADVOCATE for the Respondent(s) No. 2 MS NISHA THAKORE, APP for the Respondent(s) No. 1
======================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
Date : 11/02/2015
ORAL JUDGMENT
Page 1 of 6
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
original accused no.2-Shri R.K. Singhal, who at the relevant time was serving as Senior Manager with Union Bank of India, Amirgardh Branch, Banaskantha to quash and set aside the impugned FIR, being C.R. No. I 45/2010 registered with Amirgardh Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 3(1) (0) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989.
Page 2 of 6
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
Atrocities) Act, 1989. Hence, the applicant herein-original accused no.2 has preferred the present Criminal Miscellaneous Application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to quash and set aside the impugned proceedings on the ground that the impugned FIR against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of process of Court and law and the same has been filed with a malafide intention to get the loan sanctioned in his favour though he was not entitled to the loan of Rs.1,50,000/-.
Page 3 of 6
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
Page 4 of 6
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
Manager Shri Vihol-original accused no.1 and subsequently the applicant herein-original accused no.2 did not sanction the loan amount to the extent of Rs.1,50,000/- though the original complainant completed all the formalities and the applicant used filthy language against original complainant by not sanctioning the loan that itself cannot constitute the offence under the Indian Penal Code, more particularly, the offence as alleged in the FIR. There may be number of reasons for not sanctioning the loan. Merely because the loan amount has not been sanctioned it cannot be said that the original accused has committed any offence under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Now so far as other allegations are concerned, they are all general allegations that the applicant hereinoriginal accused no.2 used filthy language against the community of the original complainant. However, it is not alleged that the applicant-original accused no.2 was aware that by using such words against the community it will be disrespect to a particular community. It is required to be noted that even the applicant-original accused no.2 who is a non Gujarati came to be transferred to Gujarat from New Delhi on 29/07/2009 and, therefore, as such, he may not be even aware that such words can be said to be filthy language against a particular community. In any case considering the averments made in the application even no case is made out against the applicant-original accused no.2 for the offence punishable under Section Section 3(1) (0) of the Scheduled Castes and the Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. Under the circumstances, the impugned FIR against the applicant is nothing but an abuse of process of law and Court and, therefore, this is a fit case to exercise the powers under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and to quash
Page 5 of 6
R/CR.MA/5329/2010 JUDGMENT
and set aside the same.
6.1. Now so far as the contention made on behalf of Shri Rana, learned advocate that as such vide communication dated 31/07/2009 in fact the loan was sanctioned, however, by that itself it cannot be said that any offence under Section 406 is committed.
(M.R. SHAH, J.)
Siji
Page 6 of 6
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the applicant is liable to be prosecuted for cheating, insult, and atrocities for not sanctioning a bank loan.
Whether the FIR amounts to an abuse of process of court and was filed with malafide intention.
Whether the allegations constitute a maintainable criminal case against the applicant.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
R.K. SINGHAL
STATE OF GUJARAT
M.R. SHAH
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
