IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.43160 of 2016 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-366 Year-2008 Thana- GANDHIMAIDAN District- Patna ======================================================

Ram Balak Prasad S/o late Baiju Mahto Resident of 104, R P Tower , Near Jagat Trade Centre, Fraser Road, P.S. Kotwali , District Patna.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. State Of Bihar

2. Chief Manager, UCO Bank, Exhibition Road, Patna, District Patna PIN-

800001.

... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Mr.Siddhartha Prasad, Advocate For the Opposite Party/s : Mr.Mitwesh Kumar Khare, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANDEEP KUMAR ORAL ORDER

6 13-01-2026 Heard learned for the petitioner and learned A.P.P. for the State.

2. The petitioner has prayed for quashing of the order dated 21.01.2016 passed by the Learned A.C.J.M., Patna in connection with Gandhi Maidan P.S. Case No. 366/2008 whereby and whereunder the Learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offences punishable under section 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code.

3. The present F.I.R bearing Gandhi Maidan P.S Case No. 366/2008 dated 03.12.2008 , under section 406, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 474 and 120 (B) of the Indian Penal Code has been lodged on the basis of written report contained in letter dated 28.11.2008 submitted by the then Chief Manager, U.C.O Bank, Exhibition Road, Patna who was authorized to lodge this complaint alleging therein that the then two Chief Managers of Exhibition Road, Patna Branch, the then Sr. Manager of the same Branch and the two Managers of the above said Branch of the Bank entered into a criminal conspiracy in connivance with the borrower & guarantors named in the F.I.R and abused their official positions to provide undue advantage to the borrowers and guarantors for getting Cash Credit Limit of Rs 10 Lakhs for M/s Jai Mata Di, Rs 5 Lakhs for M/s Tyre Emporium, Rs 10 Lakhs for New Adarsh Medical Hall &Rs 4.5 Lakhs for M/s India Motors. The said borrower & guarantors had offered their properties as Collateral Securities for their loan accounts and the same were fraudulent in nature as the Title Deeds of the properties were fake as opined by the Empanelled Solicitors/Lawyers of the Bank, due to which the bank suffered a loss of Rs.29.54 Lakhs and these accounts have been classified as Non-Performing Assets.

4. It is the case of the petitioner that he is an Engineer by profession and has been granted License of a Registered Valuer by Ministry of Finance, Government of India and he is just a Registered Valuer and does valuation of the property as assigned by various Banks & other Financial Institutions. He was just assigned the job of valuation of property by the Bank which the petitioner did on the basis of documents provided to him and the calculation were done by the petitioner on the basis of market price of the land in the said locations and the estimated cost of development over the land, to obtain the final valuation of the property. The petitioner often had to visit the location of the property for the same and he had submitted his valuation report on 13.02.2004 wherein no misconduct anywhere in the valuation of property was made out.

5. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner was assigned the job to valuate one of the four properties mentioned in the FIR and the same was done by him and the report of the same was on the basis of the photocopy of the Registered Sale Deed handed over to the petitioner by the Bank which was submitted to the bank by the Borrower as Collateral Security and therefore for this it is the Borrower's and the Bank's responsibility to check the genuineness of the Sale/Title Deed. He next submits that it is not the duty of the of petitioner to check the authenticity of the Sale/Title Deed and that the servi