B K RAMACHANDRA ACHAR Vs. STANDARD CHARTERED BANK

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner is an accused for the offence punishable under Sections 406, 420, 424, 426 and 506(2) read with Section 34 I.P.C. Initially, a private complaint has been fled and it has been forward to the 2nd respondent police for investigation under Section 156(3) of Criminal Procedure Code. On such direction, the 2nd respondent, registered the case and investigation is pending. Under such circumstances, the present petition to quash the proceeding has been filed before this Court.

(2.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner submits that already proceedings has been initiated under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 (hereinafter referred to "Securitisation Act") before the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai and an order of attachment on the property, in security, has been passed against the petitioner. Under such circumstances, filing of the private complaint and subsequent registration of the case by the 2nd respondent is an abuse of process of Court. Even accepting the materials produced before the 2nd respondent, no prima facie case is made out. Sufficient material were not produced before the first respondent/complainant to substantiate the offence. Based on the materials available, the criminal offence is not at all made out and at the most, the 1st respondent may approach the Civil Court for appropriate remedies. After receiving the orders by the learned Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Egmore, Chennai through the Commissioner appointed by the Court, the property has also been taken in possession, which has been given for securing the loan.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioner further relied on a judgment inM/s. Indian Oil Corporation v. M/s NEPC India Ltd. and Others AIR 2006 SC 2780 and relied on the following observation: