Allowed

Smt K B Bharathi v. the State by CID

Karnataka HC4 Jul 2024CRL.P/9202/2018

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

This petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C challenged the criminal proceedings initiated against a bank employee following a complaint of financial irregularities. The court observed that central proceedings under the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act had already exonerated the petitioner of wrongdoing and dismissed the bank's claim for money recovery. The court held that persisting with the crimin

What did the court decide?

Impugned criminal proceedings and investigation were quashed against the petitioner; petition allowed.

Smt K B Bharathi Vs the State by CID — Corruption | Karnataka HC (2024)

¶1

1 - NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶3

DATED THIS THE 4^TH DAY OF JULY, 2024

¶4

BEFORE

¶5

THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE N S SANJAY GOWDA CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 9202 OF 2018 (482)

¶6

BETWEEN:

¶7

SMT. K. B. BHARATHI JUNIOR ASSISTANT, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, W/O NATARAJ, D.D.C.C. BANK LTD, HONNALI TOWN, HONNALI, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT - 577 217.

¶8

PRESENTLY WORKING AT D.D.C.C. BANK LTD., BASAVAPATNA BRANCH, CHENNAGIRI TALUK, DAVANAGERE -577 551.

¶9

…PETITIONER

¶10

(BY SRI. M. T. NANAIAH., SENIOR COUNSEL FOR SRI. PRABHUGOUD B. TUMBIGI., ADVOCATE)

¶11

Digitally signed by KIRAN KUMAR R Location: HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA

¶12

AND:

¶13

THE STATE BY C.I.D, SPECIAL CELL AND ECONOMIC OFFENCES, CALTON HOUSE, PALACE ROAD, BENGALURU - 560 001. REP. BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING BENGALURU-560 001.

¶14

NAGARAJA. G THE BRANCH MANAGER, D.D.C.C. BANK LTD,HONNALI, DAVANAGERE,

¶15

¶16

NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶17

PRESENTLY AT NYAMTHI BRANCH, DAVANAGERE DCC BANK LTD., DAVANAGERE - 577 223.

¶18

…RESPONDENTS

¶19

(BY SMT. RASHMI PATEL., HCGP FOR R-1, SRI. DEVI PRASAD SHETTY., ADVOCATE FOR R-2)

¶20

THIS CRL.P IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HON'BLE COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO QUASH THE INVESTIGATION IN FIR AND COMPLAINT DATED 24.04.2015 REGISTERED IN CR.NO.105/2015 BY THE HONNALI POLICE, HONNALI TALUK, DAVANAGERE DISTRICT FOR OFFENCES PUNISHABLE UNDER SECTIONS 403, 409, 417, 418, 420, 464, 465, 477A READ WITH 34 OF PRESENTLY INVESTIGATING BY CID POLICE, BANGALORE PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE PRINCIPAL CIVIL JUDGE (Jr.Dn) AND JMFC, HONNALI, DAVANAGERE.

¶21

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION , THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:

¶22

ORDER

¶23

The petition is filed challenging the initiation of criminal proceedings against the petitioner which has culminated in filing of a charge-sheet for offences under Sections 409, 465, 477A and 120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (“ IPC ”).

¶24

3 - NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶25

The complaint was filed by the Branch Manager, Davanagere District Co-operative Bank Limited in which the petitioner was working.

¶26

The complaint stated that criminal proceedings were to be initiated against 16 persons named in the complaint for the irregularities committed by them in the course of discharge of their duties. On investigation, a charge-sheet has also been laid against the petitioner and three others.

¶27

It is not in dispute that proceedings under Section 64

¶28

of the Karnataka Co-operative Societies Act, 1959 (for short, ‘ the Act ’) were initiated by the Department and in those proceedings, the petitioner was exonerated of any wrong-doing.

¶29

More importantly, the Bank initiated proceedings for recovery by raising a dispute under Section 70 of the Act against C.S.Kumar, M.H.Dinesh and the petitioner herein.

¶30

¶31

NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶32

It was alleged in the claim that both of them were

¶33

responsible for a loss of Rs.43,04,655/- to the Bank and the Bank was entitled to recover the said amount.

¶34

This dispute raised by the Bank was disposed of on the 15.07.2017, holding that only C.S.Kumar was liable for repayment of the sum of Rs.43,04,655/- along with interest. The Joint Registrar in those proceedings recorded a finding that there was no wrong-doing on the part of the petitioner herein and therefore, no money could be recovered from her.

¶35

Being dissatisfied with the said order, the Bank preferred an appeal to the Karnataka Appellate Tribunal in Appeal No.277 of 2017. This appeal was, however, dismissed by an order dated 31.10.2018. This order has attained finality.

¶36

In light of the above admitted facts that the proceedings for recovery had been initiated against the petitioner alleging that she was guilty of irregularities in

¶37

5 - NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶38

her discharge of employment and was liable to reimburse the loss and these proceedings having ended in a dismissal, it is obvious that no criminality could be attached to the conduct of the petitioner. The proceedings initiated on the criminal side are therefore a clear abuse of the process of the Court.

¶39

It may also be pertinent to state here that the petitioner, who had been suspended, has also been reinstated and is discharging her duties as a Junior Assistant and this would also indicate that the Bank has failed to establish that she was guilty of any misconduct, even on the departmental side.

¶40

In light of the fact that the claim for recovery against the petitioner has been dismissed, no purpose would be served by permitting a criminal prosecution and that would tantamount to a clear abuse of the process of the Court.

¶41

6 - NC: 2024:KHC:25375 CRL.P No. 9202 of 2018

¶42

Therefore, the impugned proceedings are quashed

¶43

as against the petitioner herein. The petition is accordingly allowed .

¶44

In view of the disposal of the petition, all pending

¶45

interlocutory applications, if any, stand disposed of.

¶46

Sd/JUDGE

¶47

¶48

List No.: 1 Sl No.: 29

Smt K B Bharathi v. the State by CID

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Smt K B Bharathi v. the State by CID

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Intellicomm Solutions & Enterprises Vs Itw Consulting Private Limited

Mr. Naresh Babu Vs the State of Karnataka by

Smt. Rangamma Vs Power Grid Corporation of India Ltd.

Sri. Gunavenkataramane Gowda Vs Sri. Prakash K N

Smt Jayamma Vs State of Karnataka

Mr Fakhir Gouda Vs the State of Karnataka