Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA KALABURAGI BENCH
V. Srishananda, J.
Ramchandra S/o Krishna Nayari - Appellant
Vs.
The State Through Netaji Nagar P.S., Represented By Addl. SPP High Court Of Karnataka, At Kalaburaig Bench - Respondent
Criminal Petition No.201596 of 2022
Decided On : 02-02-2023
CRIMINAL PETITION - Quashing of Criminal Proceedings - Section 482 of Cr.P.C. - IPC Sections 420, 409, 120(B) - The court discussed the legal provisions related to safe deposit locker agreements, adherence to customer mandates, wrongful loss and gain under IPC Section 420, and abuse of process of law. The court found that the petitioners, as bank managers, acted in accordance with the customer's mandate and did not benefit from any wrongful gain. It concluded that the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would result in an abuse of process of law, and therefore allowed the criminal petition to quash the proceedings only against the petitioners.
Fact of the Case:
The complaint was filed against the petitioners, who were bank managers, for allegedly allowing the misuse of a safe locker by the first accused. The petitioners argued that they adhered to the customer's mandate and were not involved in any criminal activity.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioners acted in accordance with the customer's mandate and did not benefit from any wrongful gain. It concluded that the continuation of criminal proceedings against the petitioners would result in an abuse of process of law.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioners, as bank managers, were involved in the alleged misuse of the safe locker and whether the criminal proceedings against them should be quashed.
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that the petitioners, by adhering to the customer's mandate, did not commit any criminal act and that the continuation of criminal proceedings against them would be an abuse of process of law.
Final Decision: The criminal petition was allowed, and the order of taking cognizance and all further proceedings against the petitioners were quashed.
ORDER :
Heard Sri Avinash A. Uplaonkar, learned counsel for the petitioners, Smt. Maya T.R., learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 and Sri Sudarshan M., learned counsel for respondent No.2/defacto complainant.
2. The present petition is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C., with the following prayer:
3. Brief facts which are necessary for disposal of the present petition are as under:
Shridhar R. Banare S/o Ramdas O. Banare lodged a complaint with Netajinagar Police Station, Raichur District, on 01.10.2018 which was registered in Crime No.110/2018 for the offence punishable under Section 420 r/w Section 34 of IPC against Girish Ramdas Banare and Manager of Pragati Krishna Grameen Bank.
Gist of the complaint averments reveal that the mother of the complainant by name Smt. Kamala had an Account with Pragati Krishna Grameen Bank and she also had the services of a safe locker in the joint names of the complainant and herself, at the first instance. In the said locker, 45 tola of gold rings and 65 tolas of gold ornaments were kept. So also, the original Will and other documents pertaining to immovable properties were kept in the said locker. On 19.10.2015, Smt. Kamala, who is the mother of the complainant died and on 24.05.2016, the complainant gave an application to the Bank Manager stating that the locker was to be operated in the joint names of the complainant and Smt. Kamala. Since Smt. Kamala is no more, he alone be permitted to operate the safe locker which was obtained by his mother. To his surprise, he came to know that the safe locker operations were made in the name of first accused who is his elder brother and Smt. Kamala by giving a necessary written mandate. Therefore, his request was turned down by the Manager. As such, complainant sought for action against his brother and bank officials.
4. The Police after registering the case, investigated the matter and filed chargesheet against the petitioners herein as well as the elder brother of the complainant.
5. The petitioners being the Manager of Pragati Krishna Grameen Bank and retired Chief Manager of Karnataka Grameen Bank, have challenged the chargesheet on the following grounds:
- That, the petitioners are falsely involved by respondent and there are no other evidences to state that the petitioners are involved in the above said offences, which is bad in law.
- That, the petitioner No.1 joined the services of the Bank as Probationary officer (Manager-Scale-II) and posted to Koppal branch on 09/02/2012. Thereafter he has been transferred to work at Jawahar nagar Branch and from 15-05-2012 to 15-08-2014 worked at the Branch and discharged his duties as second line officer.
- That, on 31/05/2014 petitioner No.1 was neither 1st key holder or a 2nd key holder therefore he was not aware of any operations of Locker No.66 on 31/05/2014. There were also other 2nd line officers who were looking after such duties. That, the officers who were authorized for operation of the Bank lockers are A-1 & A-4. The copy of the duty chart is enclosed herewith.
- That, petitioner No.2 was working as Branch Manager at Jawarhar Nagar Branch, Raichur from 18/05/2012 to 20/05/2014. Thus, no culpability can be fastned against the petitioner No.2 as the entire incident of misusing of the locker pertain to specifically on 31.05.2014.
- That, it is pertinent to mention that the petitioner was transferred from the Jawahar Nagar Branch Raichur to Regional Manager on promotion as
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the court can quash criminal proceedings if the material relied upon by the accused rules out the assertions contained in the charges, and if ....
The court ruled that prima facie evidence supports the allegations against the petitioner, affirming that inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. should be exercised cautiously and not for merit as....
Criminal breach of trust, cheating and conspiracy – Without existence of requisite mens rea no criminal prosecution will stand.
Specific allegations of cruelty and misappropriation are sufficient for prosecution under IPC, and no sanction under Section 188 is needed if part of the acts occurred in India.
The bank's failure to maintain standard security for lockers constituted gross negligence, establishing liability for the theft of contents.
Seizure of bank accounts and bank locker under Section 102 Cr.P.C is lawful if they have direct links with the alleged offence, and the transfer of seized property from one case to another can be jus....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
