M LAKSHMANAN Vs. ICICI BANK EMPLOYEES UNION

JUDGEMENT

(1.) All the three original side appeals arise out of the common order made in O.A.Nos.1005 to 1007 of 2010 in C.S.No.807 of 2010 dated 1.10.2010. The Original Applications raise an interesting question as to whether the conviction and sentence imposed on an employee of the bank under Section 138 of the Negotaible Instruments Act could be considered to be the conviction and sentence for an offence involving moral turpitude, thereby disentitling him to continue to be a member of the employees union and to hold the post of General Secretary of the union?

(2.) The original side appeals arise under the following circumstances. According to the plaint averments made by the first respondent union, the appellant was elected as the General Secretary of the first respondent ICICI Bank Employees Union, Chennai in the general body for the period from 14.10.2007 to 31.12.2009. The appellant became a partner in the real estate business run by Mr.Gopinath Ramadass & Mr.Gopinath Ramesh and he borrowed a sum of Rs.10 lakhs from each of them and a further similar sum from one Mr.Raja during the year 2002 assuring them of getting an immovable property at Selaiyur. Out of the said amount, the appellant purchased the property at Selaiyur, but failed to convey the same to the above three individuals. He also did not repay the said amount of Rs.30 lakhs collected from them. On demand, he issued three cheques dated 24.10.2008 in favour of the above three individuals and when those cheques were presented for payment, they were dishonoured with an endorsement no funds.

(3.) As the cheques were dishonoured, the three individuals filed a complaint before the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which was taken on file in C.C.No.10 of 2009. By order dated 18.3.2010, the learned Judicial Magistrate, Alandur found that the appellant herein being an employee of the bank and knowing the provisions of law, particularly, the Negotiable Instruments Act, had issued the cheques without maintaining sufficient balance and thereby he committed the offence punishable under the said Act. The learned Judicial Magistrate also found that the appellant involved himself in financial and real estate business while continuing in service of the bank. With those findings, the learned Judicial Magistrate convicted the appellant under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act and sentenced him to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months and to pay a fine of Rs.5,000/-, in default to undergo simple imprisonment for another six weeks. The learned Judicial Magistrate also directed the sentence imposed on the appellant in C.C.Nos.10, 11 & 12 of 2009 to run concurrently.