Judgment :

The complainant-National Bank of Oman lodged a private complaint RTC No. 260/2007 in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar against the respondent alleging that he had cheated the bank by swindling 43,15,000/-U.A.E. Dirhams (equivalent to 5.178 Crores Indian Rupees). The gist of the complaint reads as follows:

"In the year 1995, the applicant/accused opened current account with the complainant Bank on a representation that he was holding Indian Passport. The accused slowly gained confidence of the complainant Bank. In February 1996, the accused produced trading licence issued by Abu Dhabi Municipality and Town Planning and represented that he owned firm -M/s Bushra Textiles, situated at Abu Dhabi and negated in retail and wholesale trading and sale of textiles garments, stationery items, electronics etc.

The accused further represented that he was established in business at Abu Dhabi and was well supported by loyal clientele and was in process of expanding his business, which required financial facilities from the Bank. The accused also represented to the Bank that he had more than enough financial stability and viability to honour the financial commitments and pay back the finances made available to him by the Bank. Based on the said solemn representation, the Company in good faith granted to the accused overdraft facility of 2,50,000/-A.E.D. This facility was enhanced from time to time to the extent of 51 lacs A.E.D. by overdraft loan against etc. till October 2001. The accused, however, committed breach of undertaking and failed to repay the dues of the complainant Bank.

The complainant Bank, therefore, contemplated legal action against the accused in order to obtain detention orders from the competent Court at U.A.E.

The accused thereupon approached the complainant Bank in November 2002 and entered into a restructuring/settlement agreement with the accused on 12.11.2002 for A.E.D. 43,15,000/- by converting all the outstanding liabilities into a term loan to be repaid in 48 installments.

The accused undertook to pay the said amount as per terms of MOU and also issued post dated cheques for 24 monthly installments and gave assurance and undertaking that said cheques would be honoured and loan would be repaid as per the restructuring agreement between the parties and thereby induced the Bank not to take immediate action and obtain detention order. The complainant relied upon the said representation and did not take action against the accused in November for want of sufficient funds in the account and in meanwhile the accused surreptitiously and clandestinely absconded to India without discharging his loan liability."

The complainant-Bank is not having any branch or any activity in India or nor carrying on any business in India. The Bank, therefore, decided to appoint Mr. N.B. Sapkal, as its power of attorney holder for the purpose of filing complaint and taking legal steps against the respondent, who is alleged to have duped the Bank and escaped to India. The power of attorney holder is a resident of Ahmednagar and according to the Bank it was convenient for the Bank to file the complaint at Ahmednagar. The respondent being a citizen of India, necessary sanction had to be obtained from the Central Government under the proviso to Section 188 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Sanction was accordingly sought for from the Government of India and the Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, vide letter No.5/83/2007. Jud. Cell dated 26th March, 2010 accorded sanction to enquire and trial of the respondent by a court of competent jurisdiction in India.

The Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ahmednagar on 25.2.2011 passed the following order on the complaint:

"Perused complaint and the documents attached thereto. The Central Government has accorded sanction to prosecute the accused. Heard learned counsel appearing for the complainant. There are sufficient materials against the accused. The complainant has made