The judgment established the principle that recovery agents must adhere to RBI guidelines and treat borrowers humanely, and unfounded criminal charges against authorized officers for acting in accordance with the law should not be allowed to continue.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Dutt Paul, J.

1. The present revision has been preferred praying for quashing of the proceeding being No. ACGR 47/18 arising out of Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 01 of 2018 dated 3rd January, 2018 under Sections 354/506/114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, pending before the Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Alipore.

2. The petitioners’ case is that the petitioners herein are employees of IDFC First Bank Limited (Formerly known as M/s. Capital First Limited). Subsequently in terms of the order dated 6th December, 2018 passed by Hon’ble National Company Law Tribunal, Mumbai Bench in connection with Company Petition No. 3925 of 2018 the said M/s. Capital First Limited and M/s. Capital First Home Finance Limited were merged with M/s. IDFC Bank Limited.

3. The Deputy Registrar of Company pursuant to rule 29 of the Companies (Incorporation) Rules, 2014 issued the Certificate of Incorporation dated 12th January, 2019 and accordingly the name of the petitioners’ company was changed from M/s. IDFC Bank Limited to M/s. IDFC First Bank Limited.

4. That Haridevpur Police Station Case No. 1 of 2018 dated 3rd January, 2018 has been registered for investigation on the basis of a letter of complaint filed by the opposite party no. 2 before the Officer-in-Charge of Haridevpur Police Station therein alleging the commission of offences by the petitioners punishable under Sections 354/506/114 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. The petitioners’ case is that the husband of the opposite party no. 2, i.e. Mr. Kaushik Chatterjee, son of Nanda Dulal Chatterjee, residing at 12/1, Aurobinda Nagar-1, P.O. – Joka, P.S. Haridevpur, Kolkata-700 104, availed of personal loan being personal Loan Account No.10071376 from M/s. Capital First Limited. That the total amount sanctioned to him was Rs.4,00,000/- (Rupees Four Lakhs) only dated 25th February, 2017.

6. After paying few instalments, Mr. Kaushik Chatterjee failed to honour the agreement and his total outstanding dues stood at Rs.3,73,256/- as on 12th January, 2018. The personal loan had been advanced to him, upon being induced by his credibility which he projected through certain financial documents and the said facility was advanced to him upon his representations that all liabilities as accrues upon him shall be discharged by him as per the loan agreement.

7. However, he has refused to discharge his liabilities as had accrued upon him with respect to the abovementioned personal loan on various occasions irrespective of request by the officers of M/s. Capital First Limited and throughout refused to pay any heed to meet his liability. On the contrary, he has threatened the officers of the company with dire consequences.

8. On 17th December, 2017, the petitioners who are the officers of M/s. Capital First Limited, visited the residence of Mr. Kaushik Chatterjee and tried to persuade him, to make payments with an earnest hope that he would discharge his liabilities but unfortunately the wife of Mr. Kaushik Chatterjee, i.e. Opposite Party no. 2 along with one unknown person namely, Sanjeev joined the discussion and started a heated debate with regard to the outstanding payment regarding the personal loan. It was during this time, that the complainant threatened the petitioners that they will not pay a single of farthing and will harass them by lodging false complaint against the petitioners.

9. Mr. Debangan Bhattacharya, learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners herein are the officers of M/s. Capital First Limited, a non banking financial institution providing debts financing to its customers. The petitioners are personnels having requisite qualification and maturity to handle the sensitive situations. Even, when the fraudulent defaulters fail to pay the instalments, the petitioners duly follow the guidelines for recovery which contemplates that no use of force or abuse is used in recovery proceedings. The Opposite Party No. 2, taking advantage of her gender, h