VASANTLAL N SHAH Vs. PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK RAJKOT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner was working as Accountant with the respondent Punjab National Bank in the branch office of the Bank at Dhrangadhra at the relevant time. Against him F.I.R. is lodged for the offences punishable under Sections 409 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code for the alleged defalcation to the tune of Rs. 2 89 830 which was first decided in June 1987. Thereafter the above F.I.R. was filed on 12/06/1987 for which 10 different charge-sheets are submitted by the investigating officer before Judicial Magistrate First Class Dhrangadhra. The cases are not yet committed to the Sessions Court. The petitioner has been suspended by an order dated 13-6-87. Thereafter the respondent initiated departmental enquiry against the petitioner for which charge-sheet was given on 15-10-87. The petitioner submitted his reply dated 25/30-10-87 to the said charge-sheet denying all the charges. The petitioner has further stated in the aforesaid reply that the petitioner had not prepared any TPO and was not liable for fictitious credits by preparing bogus advices in the alleged six accounts and fraudulent withdrawn of the amounts from these accounts by forging signature. He has also slated that he was neither aware of such bogus account nor had opened any account and as such he is not at all concerned in any way either in opening the accounts or in the withdrawal of any amount. Thereafter the petitioner has filed this petition wherein it has been prayed that respondent No. 1 be directed not to hold any departmental enquiry against the petitioner on the basis of the charge-sheet Annexure C till the final disposal of the criminal case.

(2.) Rule is issued in the matter. Al the time of admission of the matter the Court had passed he following order: Leave to amend. Rule. Ad-interim relief in terms of para 25(B). However in is clarified that in will be open to the respondent authorities to request the Court for modifying or for vacating the interim relief after filing affidavit-in-reply. In the facts and circumstances of the case in is directed that respondents shall file affidavit-in-reply latest before 31/07/1988 If the respondents so feel they may file affidavit-in-reply even before the aforesaid date and may make request to the Court as stated herein above. Thereafter affidavit-in-reply is filed by Mr. V.R. Sachdev Senior Manager of the Bank. Mr. Shah learned advocate appearing for the respondent Bank submitted that the ad-interim relief granted by this Court be vacated so that the department can finalise the enquiry.

(3.) At the time of hearing of this petition Mr. Bhatt learned advocate appearing for the petitioner vehemently submitted that at present the criminal prosecution is pending before the Judicial Magistrate First Class at Dhrangadhra and the trial will commence shortly in the Ses- sions Court after the criminal cases are commitled to the Sessions Court; the allegation against the petitioner is for misappropriation or the amount of Rs. 2 89 830 therefore pending crimi- nal trial further proceedings in departmental enquiry should be stayed. He submitted that on identical facts if the departmental enquiry is held in would cause prejudice to the petitioner.