Exoneration in administrative proceedings can negate criminal liability if the same charges are involved, as established by precedent.

BEFORE THE MADURAI BENCH OF MADRAS HIGH COURT RESERVED ON : 14.11.2025 PRONOUNCED ON : 19.11.2025 CORAM THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SUNDER MOHAN CRL OP(MD). No.3993 of 2025 and Crl.MP(MD)No.2803 of 2025 P.Jeyaraman ... Petitioner/Accused No.6 Vs.

1. The State of Tamilnadu, Rep by the Inspector of Police, CCIW Police Station, Dindigul District.

Crime No.05 of 2017. ... 1^st respondent/Complainant

2. Mr.P.Manikandan ... 2^nd respondent/Defacto Complainant PRAYER :- This Petition is filed under Section 528 BNSS, to call for the records pertaining to impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.95 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate III Court, Madurai, for the alleged offences under Sections 409, 468, 471, 477A, 420 r/w 120(b) of IPC as far as the petitioner is concerned and quash the same.

For Petitioners : Mr.T.Thirumurugan For Respondents : Mr.R.Meenakshi Sundaram, Additional Public Prosecutor (for R1)

ORDER

This Petition is filed to quash the impugned charge sheet in C.C.No.95 of 2021 on the file of the learned Judicial Magistrate III Court, Madurai, for the alleged offences under Sections 409, 468, 471, 477A, 420 r/w 120(b) of IPC as far as the petitioner is concerned

2. The gist of the allegation in the impugned final report which was filed against nearly 15 accused is that the petitioner was working as an Assistant General Manager of Dindugul District Central Co-operative Bank, Badlagundu Branch; that through the said branch on 23.06.2010, a sum of Rs.1,30,000/- was advanced as a loan and the petitioner arrayed as 6^th accused along with A1 to A4 and A8 by taking advantage of the illiteracy of the recipients of the loan had deducted Rs.15,000/- and paid the balance sum and thereafter, did not take any steps to recover the loan paid and thus caused a loss of Rs.1,16,561/- to the bank.

3. The broad allegation as against the first four accused is that they through several branches had permitted sanction of loan to Self Help Women Group between 19.03.2007 to 04.06.2012; that they had not collected the said sum and therefore they along with the other accused who where in the individual branches had conspired and caused a total loss of Rs.20,33,974/- to the bank. The prosecution was initiated at the instance of the Deputy Registrar of the Co-operative Society.

4. The learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the primary allegation as against this petitioner who was working as an Assistant General Manager is that in one of the branches the petitioner also had sanctioned loan along with the other accused and caused a loss of Rs.1,16,561/- to the said branch; that he has nothing to do with the alleged loss caused by A1 to A4 through other branches; that in any case the surcharge proceedings which were initiated were dropped on appeal filed by him in CMA (CS) No.24 of 2019 by the Appellate Cooperative Tribunal, Dindugal [hereinafter referred to as 'the tribunal']; that the petitioner has also been exonerated in the disciplinary proceedings in the revision filed by him before the Joint Registrar of Tamil Nadu Co-

operative Societies; that in both the proceedings it was held that the petitioner had not committed any act of criminal misappropriation or had caused financial loss to the bank; and that this Court in similar circumstances where the persons in supervisory capacity have been exonerated from the surcharge proceedings, had quashed the proceedings and sought for quashing of the impugned proceedings as well.

5. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor per contra submitted that the surcharge proceedings and disciplinary proceedings are different from the criminal proceedings and the petitioner cannot seek quashing merely because he has been exonerated in th