SYNDICATE BANK Vs. SHIVA A AMIN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner, in both the petitions, is a bank and was the complainant, alleging that the respondents herein, who were the borrowers, had pledged certain articles to secure due repayment of the loan and on a routine inspection, it was discovered that several gold articles, which had been pledged with the bank as security for the loans obtained, were found to be spurious and the gold, articles pledged by the present respondents, according to the appellant, were also not genuine. In that background, several criminal cases had been filed, including against the present respondents. The respondents had been brought to trial. Though the complaint was resisted, the respondents were found guilty. The respondents in Criminal Revision Petition No. 1258/2008 was convicted by the trial court and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months ' and to pay a fine of Rs. 1,000/ - and the respondent in Criminal Revision Petition No. 1259/2008 was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for three months and to pay a fine of Rs. 2,000/ -. The same having been challenged in appeal, the appellate court had acquitted the accused.

(2.) INCIDENTALLY , it is not in dispute that insofar as the loan transaction is concerned, both the respondents have discharged the loan. However, the controversy remains as to whether the gold that was initially pledged by the respective respondents was genuine gold or otherwise. It now transpires that the bank when it sought to return the gold articles on discharge of the loan transaction, both the respondents have consistently claimed that the gold that was deposited by them was genuine and the gold that is now sought to be returned by the bank is not. It is in that background that the appellant has chosen to prefer these appeals. The Supreme Court in the case of C.B.I. vs. Duncans Agro Industries Limited, 1996 5 SCC 591and B.S. Joshi vs. State of Haryana, 2003 4 SCC 675, which has been referred to and followed in C.B.I. vs. Narendra Lal, 2014 5 SCC 364, having held that in situations where civil and criminal proceedings are initiated simultaneously or even otherwise if no civil proceedings are initiated, and if the criminal complaint arises out of a civil transaction and that transaction having come to a close as in the present case on hand, the respondent who had borrowed the loans having cleared the loans, the criminal proceeding, if any, was also deemed to have been compounded. In the present case on hand, the bank claiming that it was cheated, would not arise as laid down by the Supreme Court in the aforesaid decisions.

(3.) CONSEQUENTLY , the controversy as to whether or not the gold that is now sought to be returned was the gold, that was originally deposited by the respective respondents, cannot be the subject matter of the present revision petition. In any event, the allegations against the respondents have become redundant, in view of the loan transaction having been cleared and therefore, the parties are left to their remedies insofar as the controversy about the genuineness or otherwise of the gold involved. With that observation, the petitions stands disposed of.