Madhya Pradesh High Court
Ashok Kumar Sahu vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh on 11 April, 2018
THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MCRC-11518-2016
(ASHOK KUMAR SAHU Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH)
15
Jabalpur, Dated : 11-04-2018
Mr. Rajesh Maindiretta, learned counsel for the petitioner.
Mr. Pramod Choubey, learned Govt. Adv. for the
respondent/State.
This petition under Section 482 of Cr.P.C has been filed to sh invoke the extra ordinary jurisdiction of this Court and to quash the e FIR at Crime No.414/2016, registered at Police Station Kotwali on ad 22.4.2016, wherein offence under Section 409, 420, 467, 468 & 471 of Pr IPC has been registered against the accused persons including the applicant Ashok Kumar Sahu.
a hy The gist of the matter, in brief is that, there was a tender for auctioning the liquor shops at Katni, for which demand drafts were ad submitted by different persons. The applicant Ashok Kumar Sahu was M the Dy. General Manager of Canara Bank, Bhopal. He has stopped the payment of demand drafts worth Rs.8,07,01,470/- (Rupees Eight of Crore, Seven Lacs, One Thousand Four Hundred Seventy) on the rt ground that these 43 demand drafts are forged.
ou The applicant had filed W.P.No.7706/2016, which was decided on 10.7.2017. The applicant Ashok Kumar Sahu Dy. General Manager C Bhopal has stopped the payment of the demand drafts. On the report of h Radhacharan Dwivedi, District Excise Officer Katni, FIR was lodged. ig It has been found that co-accused Krishna Dutt Dubey was the officer H of the Canara Bank responsible for issuing demand drafts alleged to be forged ones and accused Amta Singh has counter signed these demand drafts.
Surprisingly, FIR does not express the names of the persons, who have submitted the demand drafts before the Excise Department during the auction. They could be the real culprits along with the persons, who have issued the forged demand drafts. The applicant being the Dy. General Manager of the Canara Bank was within his rights to refuse honoring the demand drafts for the demand drafts are allegedly forged ones. The applicant being the employee of the Canara Bank has bonafidely performed his duty to protect the interest of the bank and, therefore, refused to make the payment.
Keeping in view the above circumstances and the fact that the applicant is neither having entrusted any property, therefore, there is no criminal breach of trust, nor the applicant, in any manner, responsible for preparing forged documents (demand drafts). Hence, it would be misuse of the process of the Court if the applicant is allowed to be prosecuted. Following the law laid down in the case of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Bhajan Lal & Ors. 1992 Supp (1) SCC 335, sh this petition is allowed.
e Before parting with the order, it would be appropriate to mention ad here that the proceeding may be initiated against the persons, who are Pr responsible for preparing and issuing demand drafts and the the persons, who used these demand drafts to be genuine knowing well a that the drafts are forged. They are the really wrong doers.
hy Proceedings may be initiated against them, if not initiated so far.
ad FIR at Crime No.414/2016, so far as it relates to the applicant M Ashok Kumar Sahu is quashed. Against co-accused persons Krishna Dutt Dubey & Amta Singh, proceeding may commence in accordance of with law.
rt (SUSHIL KUMAR PALO) ou JUDGE C h Digitally signed by NEETI TIWARI ig Date: 2018.04.16 15:52:55 -07'00' H nd