IMPORTANT POINT
When a prima facie case has been made out against the accused for framing of charge, the criminal case should not be quashed.

JUDGMENT

S.B. Sinha, J.—

1. Leave granted.

2. Application of the provisions of Section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) is in question in this application. The said question arises in the following factual matrix.

3. Appellant and her husband (A-4) along with various other persons including the officers of the Oriental Bank of Commerce Khidirpur Branch, Calcutta (hereinafter called ‘the Bank’) were prosecuted for alleged commission of offences under Sections 120-B/ 420/467/468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The officers of the Bank had also been prosecuted under Sections 13(2) read with Section 13(1)(d) of the Prevention and Corruption Act, 1988.

4. A charge sheet was filed against the appellant and seven others. She was inter alia charged for taking the benefit of overdrafts between the period 8th February, 1993 to 5th March, 1993 without furnishing any security.

5. For the purpose of realisation of the said amount, indisputably the Bank filed an application for recovery thereof before the Debt Recovery Tribunal. It is not in dispute that before the said Tribunal, appellant and the Bank had entered into a settlement pursuant whereto or in furtherance a sum of Rs.25.51 lacs was paid.

6. It is also not in dispute that for the said purpose, the C.B.I. had returned the title deeds in respect of the property which were kept as security for obtaining the loan from the bank.

7. On or about 22.02.2006 the Appellant filed an application under section 239 of the Code for discharge, inter alia, contending:-

i) That having regard to the settlement arrived at between her and the Bank no case for proceeding against her has been out.

ii) That she having already paid Rs. 25.51 Lacs and the CBI having returned the title deeds which had been kept as security for the loan from the said bank, the criminal proceeding should be dropped relying on or on the basis of the said settlement.

iii) That the dispute between the parties were purely civil in nature and that she had not fabricated any document or cheated the bank in anyway what so ever, charges could not have been framed against her.

8. In response to the said application the CBI had contended that mere payment of loan to the bank could not exonerate the accused from a criminal proceeding.

9. The learned Judge, Special Court Alipore in Special Case No. 3 of 1993 vide order dated 12.12.2006 dismissed the application of the appellant noting that mere repayment could not exonerate the accused from the prima facie charge in a criminal case.

10. On or about 06.03.2007 the appellant filed a revision application under section 401 and 402 of the CrPC before the High Court of Calcutta which was registered as CRR No. 910 of 2007.

Before the High Court, it was argued that further continuation of the criminal proceeding, despite repayment of the amount of loan by the appellant, would amount to an abuse of the process of Court and the same should, therefore, be quashed.

11. In the said revision application the CBI contended that the criminal case against the appellant was started not only for obtaining loan but also on the ground of criminal conspiracy with the bank officials. It was accordingly contended that the court below had rightly rejected the application and the impugned order does not warrant any interference.

12. On or about 17.07.2007 the learned Single Judge of the High Court dismissed the revision application. The court after discussing the arguments of both the parties opined :

“I have taken into consideration the submissions of the ld. Advocates for both the sides. It is the case of the prosecution that the loan in question was sanctioned in favour of the petitioner by way of forming a criminal conspiracy, which was allegedly engineered by the bank officials. It is further been alleged that this accused/petitioner also took part in the said conspiracy. Now it is the admitted position that after investigation charge sheet has also been filed