Dismissed¶61

Vijaykumar J v. State of Karnataka

Karnataka HC14 Aug 2025CRL.P/3719/2020

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

S.482 CrPC quashing petition by ex-SBI branch manager (accused No.9) rejected; charge sheet C.C.No.583/2018 arising from Cr.No.168/2018, Koratagere PS; IPC Ss.408, 409, 420, 468 r/w 34; alleged signature forgery and fraudulent transfers by housekeeping staff with managers passing transactions unverified; only one transaction during petitioner's tenure (17.11.2014-03.05.2015); FSL report awaited; prosecution to prove allegations in full-fledged trial. Karnataka HC, 14-08-2025, J.M.Khazi J.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner indisputably worked as Manager of the SBI Holavanahalli Branch from 17.11.2014 to 03.05.2015, and during that period one transaction was carried out transferring amount from a customer's account to that of accused No.1. ¶57

Vijaykumar J Vs State of Karnataka — Cheating and Forgery | Karnataka HC (2025)

What the court decided

AI extract

Outcome

Dismissed

¶61

Issue for consideration

Whether the charge sheet in C.C.No.583/2018 (arising out of Cr.No.168/2018) pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Koratagere, and further proceedings against the petitioner (accused No.9) should be quashed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. +1 more

¶30

Court's answer

The FSL report of some of the transactions is awaited, and it is for the prosecution to establish the allegations in a full-fledged trial.

¶57

Ratio / Principle

¶57

Key takeaways

Consequently, it is not a case for quashing the criminal proceedings; it is open to the petitioner to put forth his defence at the trial.ratio¶57

Detailed headnote1 paragraphs

High Court of Karnataka, Bengaluru — CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020, decided 14 August 2025 by Ms. Justice J.M.Khazi. Petitioner Vijaykumar J, arraigned as accused No.9, a retired serviceman who served as Branch Manager of SBI Holavanahalli Branch, Koratagere Taluk, from 17.11.2014 to 03.05.2015, sought under Section 482 Cr.P.C quashing of the charge sheet in C.C.No.583/2018 (arising out of Cr.No.168/2018 dated 08.09.2018 of Koratagere Police Station) pending before the Civil Judge and JMFC, Koratagere, for offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 420, 468 r/w Section 34 IPC. The case arose from a complaint by respondent No.2, the branch Manager, alleging that accused No.1, a housekeeping boy at the branch, forged customers' signatures and transferred/drew amounts (including Rs.11,39,000/- credited to his own account from 21 accounts) during 01.04.2011 to 03.08.2018, and that the Managers serving in that period, including the petitioner, passed transactions without cross-verifying signatures with specimen signatures. Held: during the petitioner's tenure only one such transaction occurred; the FSL report on some transactions is awaited; it is for the prosecution to establish the allegations in a full-fledged trial; hence it is not a case for quashing, and the petitioner may put forth his defence at trial. Petition rejected; Registry directed to send a copy of the order to the trial court through e-mail.

¶1

NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶2

¶3

HC-KAR

¶4

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU

¶5

DATED THIS THE 14^TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2025

¶6

BEFORE

¶7

THE HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶8

CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 3719 OF 2020

¶9

(482(Cr.PC) / 528(BNSS))

¶10

BETWEEN:

¶11

VIJAYKUMAR J

¶12

S/O JOSEPH RET. MANAGER SBI RET. CORPORAL AT INDIAN AIRFORCE AGED ABOUT 58 YEARS R/A 628-A, 17TH CROSS, NEAR LIC DIVISION-2 OFFICE, INDIRANAGAR 2ND STAGE, BANGALORE-560038

¶13

…PETITIONER

¶14

(BY SRI. SANDEEP HEGDE, ADVOCATE)

¶15

AND:

¶16

Digitally signed by REKHA R

¶17

Location: High Court of Karnataka

¶18

STATE OF KARNATAKA BY KORATAGERE POLICE STATION TUMKUR DISTRICT

¶19

REP BY STATE P.P. OFFICE

¶20

HIGH COURT COMPLEX, BANGALORE-560001

¶21

GANGADHARAPPA SBI BANK MANAGER HOLAVANA HALLI BRANCH KORATAGERE TALUK, TUMKUR DISTRICT-577116.

¶22

…RESPONDENTS

¶23

(BY SMT.N.ANITHA GIRISH, HCGP FOR R1)

¶24

2 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶25

HC-KAR

¶26

THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S.482 CR.P.C BY THE ADVOCATE FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING TO QUASH THE CHARGE SHEET BEARING C.C.NO.583/2018 ARISING OUT OF CR.NO.168/2018 DATED 08.09.2018 PENDING BEFORE THE HONBLE CIVIL JUDGE AND JMFC, KORATAGERE FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 408,409,420,468 R/W 34 OF IPC AND ALL FURTHER INVESTIGATION AND PROCEEDINGS AS AGAINST THE PETITIONER.

¶27

THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR DICTATING ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE J.M.KHAZI

¶28

ORAL ORDER

¶29

Petitioner who is arraigned as accused No.9 has filed

¶30

this petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C, with a prayer to quash the charge sheet in C.C.No.583/2018, on the file of Civil Judge and JMFC, Koratagere, for the offences punishable under Sections 408, 409, 420, 468 r/w Section 34 of IPC (arising out of Cr.No.168/2018 of Koratagere PS).

¶31

In support of the petition, the petitioner has contended that on the basis of complaint filed by respondent No.2, case is registered and charge sheet is filed against petitioner and others. Petitioner has not

¶32

3 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶33

HC-KAR

¶34

committed the alleged offences and he has been falsely implicated. He is an Ex-servicemen served as Radar Technician in Indian Air Force. He was holding the rank of Corporal for 15 years from 1979 to 1994 and attained Superannuation with clean record. After retirement, he

¶35

joined SBI in 1995 and worked till May 2015. From 17.11.2014 to 03.05.2015, he worked as Branch Manager of Holavanahalli Branch, Koratagere Taluk.

¶36

2.1 There were no complaints against the petitioner. In the complaint and the statement of witnesses, the names of Managers, who served from 01.04.2011 to 03.08.2018 are included as accused alleging that they had helped accused No.1 to transfer the amount to his account. Except this, there are no other allegations. In the charge sheet, it is alleged that accused No.1 has committed 87 fraudulent transactions. None of these transactions were held during the period when petitioner was the Manager. There is no evidence to connect the petitioner with the alleged crime. Continuation of the

¶37

4 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶38

HC-KAR

¶39

criminal proceedings would amount to abuse of process of the Court.

¶40

On the other hand learned High Court Government Pleader representing respondent No.1 State and learned counsel representing respondent No.2 would submit that on 08.09.2018, the Manager, State Bank of India, Holavanahalli Branch, Koratagere, Tumakuru filed complaint against accused No.1 Chandrashekhar H.S. @ Chandru, who was working as house keeping boy in the said branch. The complaint reveal that on 03.08.2018, in the pay-in slip for transfer of Rs.45,000/- from the A/c.No.64061657708 of Sharadamma to A/c

¶41

No.54050755019, he noticed that the signature of said Sharadamma was not tallying with her specimen signature and request her presence before him. However, accused No.1 said that Sharadamma has already left. Therefore, complainant kept the voucher pending and waited for her on the next day. When Sharadamma did not come on the

¶42

5 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶43

HC-KAR

¶44

next day, he questioned accused No.1

¶45

H.S.Chandrashekhar and on verification found that the A/c No.54050755019 to which the money was instructed to be transferred belongs to accused No.1 H.S.Chandrashekhar and on enquiry he said that Sharadamma requested to get the money transfer to his account and thereafter hand over cash.

¶46

3.1 Doubting his bonafides, complainant questioned accused No.1 as to whether he has done similar thing earlier, which he answered in the negative. However, when he verified the A/c.No.54050755019, he found that in all Rs.11,39,000/- was transferred to his account from 21 accounts. In this regard accused No.1 has given letter admitting the said fact. An enquiry officer appointed by the Bank has submitted report stating that in all 100 transactions were made from 27.10.2014 to 03.08.2018

¶47

and during the said period, the previous bank Managers, including the petitioner, have passed the transactions

¶48

6 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶49

HC-KAR

¶50

without cross-verifying whether the signature in the pay-in slips tally with the specimen signature of the customers. In this regard, so far 16 customers have given complaints and accordingly, he is filing the complaint.

¶51

3.2 Based on the complaint, concerned police registered the case in Cr.No.168/2018 and after conducting detailed investigation filed charge sheet against accused Nos.1 to 9, which includes the present petitioner. There is prima facie material to proceed against the petitioner and pray to dismiss the petition.

¶52

Heard arguments and perused the record.

¶53

Thus, the specific allegation against all the accused persons including the petitioner are that while working in State Bank of India, Holavanahalli branch, Koratagere taluka, Tumakuru, accused No.1 who was working as house keeping boy in the said bank has drawn

¶54

7 - NC: 2025:KHC:31673 CRL.P No. 3719 of 2020

¶55

HC-KAR

¶56

lakhs of rupees from the account of its customers on the basis of withdrawal forms by forging the signatures of the account holders for the period 01.04.2011 to 03.08.2018 and the Managers who worked during the said period have allowed the transaction without cross-verifying whether the signatures in the voucher tally with the specimen signature of the account holders.

¶57

Undisputedly, petitioner has worked as Manager in the said Bank from 17.11.2014 to 03.05.2015 and during the said period, one transaction is carried out transferring amount from the account of the customer to that of accused No.1. After conducting details investigation, the concerned police have filed charge sheet. The FSL report of some of the transactions is awaited. It is for the prosecution to establish the allegations in a full fledged trial. Consequently, it is not a case for quashing the criminal proceedings. It is open to the petitioner to put forth his defence at the trial and accordingly, the following:

¶58