ANJANI KUMAR SHARAN, J.:–Heard Mr. P.K. Shahi, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Girijish Kumar for the petitioners and learned APP for the State. The opposite party no.2 appears on 31.10.2018 in one of the batch cases, i.e., Cr. Misc. No.38208 of 2019 by filing Vakalatnama, but till date even after expiry of more than two years, opposite party no.2 has not filed any reply in the quashing application filed by the petitioner. Opposite Party No.2 has only filed I.A. No.01/2019 for vacating the stay granted by this Court, but I.A. No.01/2019 has not been pressed by opposite party no.2 till date. Today also, nobody appears on behalf of opposite party no.2.

2. In view of the facts aforesaid, these quashing applications are being disposed of by this common judgment on the basis of materials available on record.

3. The petitioners, in all the above petitions, have sought quashing of the FIR pertaining to Kotwali P.S. Case No.651 of 2018 dated 23.09.2018 which has been instituted for under Sections 197, 198, 201, 409, 406, 499, 500, 504 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

4. In Cr. Misc. No.69484 of 2018, petitioner no.1 is the bank of which petitioner no.2 is the Managing Director, HDFC Bank Ltd., Senapati Bapat Marg, Lower Patel (West), P.S.- N.M. Joshi Marg, Mumbai. In Cr. Misc. No.69402 of 2018, the sole petitioner is the Head Audit and Compliance, HDFC Bank, Mumbai. In Cr. Misc. No.70334 of 2018, the petitioner is State Head – WBO, HDFC Bank Ltd., Bihar. In Cr. Misc. No.72375 of 2018, petitioner no.1 is the Regional Head Audit - East, HDFC Bank, Kolkata and petitioner no.2 is the Vice President-Audit, HDFC Bank, Kolkata. In Cr. Misc. No.72379 of 2018, the petitioner is the Head Operation, HDFC Bank Ltd., Mumbai. In Cr. Misc. No.72549 of 2018, petitioner no.1 is the Chief Compliance Officer, HDFC Bank, Mumbai and petitioner no.2 is the Vice President Compliance, HDFC Bank, Mumbai. In Cr. Misc. No.73265 of 2018, the petitioner is the Head RBCU East, HDFC Bank Ltd., Kolkata. In Cr. Misc. No.74706 of 2018, the petitioner is the Regional Head Operation, HDFC Bank Ltd., Kolkata and in Cr. Misc. No.76445 of 2018, the petitioner is the State Head -WBO, HDFC Bank Ltd., Bihar.

5. The prosecution case is that the opposite party no.2 filed Complaint Case No.3805(c)/2018 before the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna wherein he alleged that he was appointed to the part of Executive Transactional Banking Group (Operation) vide letter dated 24.07.2002 issued under the signature of the Head H.R. Operation, HDFC Bank Ltd., Mumbai and the complainant joined at Patna in August, 2002. O.P. No.2 further stated that after working for almost 14 years with the company and while he was working as Deputy Vice President at Patna, he was put under suspension vide letter dated 25.02.2016 issued by Gourab Roy, RH-WBO-East (accused) on certain lapses on his part while, thereafter, all of sudden vide letter dated 28.06.2016 issued under the signature of Anuj V. Mathur (accused), the opposite party no.2 was terminated from the service without any show cause/Memo/Charge or any communication in this regard. O.P. No.2 further alleged that said illegal termination was challenged in Civil Suit No.212/17 in which HDFC Bank awarded penalty of Rs.200/- for non-appearance and in which HDFC appeared after ex-parte order passed by the court. The O.P. No.2 further stated that he was in touch with immediate supervisor Gourab Roy (accused) regarding progress of the pending investigation but he was not informed regarding the same. O.P. No.2 sought information under Right to Information Act from Reserve Bank of India than Reserve Bank of India provided the information vide letter dated 13.07.2017 and confirmed that HDFC Bank reported a fraud incidence of Rs.1.86 crore at Patna and Bhagalpur Branch. The O.P. No.2 again approached the RBI, under RTI and he came to know that HDFC Bank filed a police complaint regarding fraud to the State Police vide GD No.1143 dated 29.07.201