Vicarious liability cannot be imposed on directors solely by virtue of their positions; specific allegations of wrongdoing must exist for criminal liability to be established.

Judgment :

Savitri Ratho, J.

1. This application has been filed with a prayer to quash the entire proceeding arising out of 1CC No.39 of 2016 filed against the petitioners in the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class (in short “JMFC”), Barbil, the consequential actions pursuant to the order dated 06.12.2016 passed therein and to quash the order dated 06.12.2016 and all consequential action taken on the FIR, if any, by the IIC Barbil in pursuance of the order dated 06.12.2016 passed by the learned J.M.F.C. Barbil in ICC Case No 39 of 2016.

2. In the complaint petition, Petitioner No. 1 Mr. R. Seshasayee has been described to be the Chairman of IndusInd Bank (in short “the Bank”); Petitioners No. 2 to 7, the Directors of the Bank; Petitioner No. 8 Mr. Ramesh Sobti is described to be the Managing Director of the Bank; and Petitioner No. 9 Mr. Yashodhan M. Kale the Alternate Director of the Bank. The Bank is arrayed as an accused, but it has not been represented by anybody in the complaint petition. It appears that the status of Petitioners No. 1 to 9 had changed, by the time the CRLMC was filed which is apparent from the cause title of the CRLMC.

BACKGROUND

3. Opposite party No. 2 had filed Consumer Complaint No 328 of 2012 against the IndusInd Bank in respect of the same occurrence, before the National Consumer Disputes Redressal Commission, New Delhi, which was dismissed on 12.12.2014 as not maintainable observing that it was open to the complainant to seek remedy before the appropriate forum. Copy of the order is Annexure 8 to the CRLMC.

4. In 2013, 1CC No.05 of 2013 had been filed by Opposite party No 2, against three officers of the Bank-Ashok Kumar Sahoo, Laxman Kumar Patro and Somnath Dutta alleging commission of offences under Sections 465 , 468 , 471, 417, 427, 120-B, 409/34 of the I.P.C. It was stated in the complaint that the Bank had made 16 forward contracts within the contractual period of one year without any request or confirmation by the complainant, in absence of foreign buyers contract and without any stamped forward contract of the complainant. It was alleged that the Bank had made the forward contract dated 21.09.2011 without any request, authority or documentary evidence. The signatures of the complainant had been forged and the application for forward contract had been fabricated. Accused No. 1 Ashok Kumar Sahoo and Accused No.2 Laxman Kumar Patro had connived together to fabricate and manipulate documents and Accused No. 3 Somnath Dutta was the abettor of the documents. The complaint was sent under Section – 156 (3) Code of Criminal Procedure (in short “the Cr.P.C”) to the IIC, Barbil Police Station to register a case and carry out investigation. Pursuant to such direction, Barbil P.S. Case No.35 of 2013 was registered on 04.03.2013 against those officers. This corresponds to G.R. Case No.128 of 2013 in the file of the learned JMFC, Barbil. Subsequently, investigation was taken up by the EOW, Bhubaneswar and chargesheet dated 26.09.2017 has been filed under Sections 467, 471, 418 , 120- B, 201 of the IPC against Laxman Kumar Patra, Ashok Kumar Sahoo, Somnath Datta and Rudranarayan Pati.

The complaint petition is Annexure 2 to the CRLMC.

5. In the month of November, 2013, while investigation was pending in Barbil P.S. Case No.35 of 2013, the Opposite Party No.2 filed 1CC No.58 of 2013 against the present Petitioners No. 1 to 9 in the Court of the l