KISANLAL DAGDULAL RATHI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This group of petitions is being decided together in as much as the petitioners seek quashing of First Information Reports (FIRs), registered against them at Chalisgaon Police Station, for offences punishable under Section 406, 408, 409, 420, 465, 468, 471, 120 read with Section 34 of the I.P. Code.

(2.) The Chalisgaon Peoples Cooperative Bank Limited (for short, CPCO Bank) is a Cooperative Bank. A large number of depositors invested their amounts by way of deposits in the CPCO Bank. The CPCO Bank was under management of a Board of Directors. Indisputably, an Liquidator is now appointed and is managing the affairs of the CPCO Bank. It is undisputed that a Special Auditor carried out audit of the CPCO Bank for the period between 1991-92 to 2005-06. He prepared audit inspection notes. He noticed a large number of misdeeds committed by the Directors and borrowers of the CPCO Bank during the period under the audit inspection. He noticed that some of the Directors and the borrowers were handinglove. They had duped the Bank in connivance with each other. Huge loans were disbursed to the kiths and kins, friends and close associates of the Directors without obtaining proper securities and without following regular norms. Resultantly, the recoveries of such loans became highly improbable. The depositors of the CPCO Bank were defrauded due to such malpractices adopted by the Directors and some of the borrowers. The CPCO Bank has been put to great financial loss. Thus, the hard earned money of the depositors became unsafe and they were unable to get back the deposited amounts. The borrowers had no intention to repay nor the amounts were lent after taking proper precaution. The Directors and the borrowers conspired to misappropriate the amounts of the CPCO Bank. They doctored various documents in order to prepare record regarding disbursement of the loans, though such amounts were embezzled and misappropriated in connivance with each other by the borrowers and some of the Directors. The borrowers were found in arrears of the amounts to the extent of Rs. 3,93,02,538/as on 31st March, 2006. The Special Auditor was directed to lodge a report. He, therefore, filed First Information Reports at Chalisgaon Police Station, which were registered vide crime Nos. 250/2008, 252/2008, 256/2008 and 259/2008, against as many as twenty (20) Ex-Directors, one (1) Ex-Chairman, five (5) borrowers and one (1) Ex-Manager of the CPCO Bank.

(3.) Briefly stated, case of petitioner Kishanlal in Criminal Writ Petition No. 922/2008 is that he availed loan facility of the CPCO Bank in the year 1998. He repaid the loan amount from time to time in accordance with the rules and regulations of the Bank. He was again and again given loan facility since ha had cleared the earlier debt. He executed necessary documents from time to time by way of security for repayment of the loan. The CPCO Bank initiated proceedings against him under Section 101 of the Maharashtra Cooperative Societies Act, 1960 (for short, the MCS Act) for recovery of the loan amount. The learned Assistant Registrar (Cooperative Societies) rejected the application for issuance of such certificate and, therefore, the CPCO Bank had preferred revision application No. 65/2008 under Section 154 of the MCS Act. The revisional authority remanded the proceedings to the Assistant Registrar with direction to conduct de novo inquiry. The Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies again refused to issue the certificate and the said order is now sub judice before the Divisional Joint Registrar in revision application No. 19/2008. The FIR is lodged with ulterior motive to coax him to shell out the disputed amount as desired by the CPCO Bank. He has filed Dispute No. 1163/2008 in the Cooperative Court, Jalgaon for declaration that the amount claimed by the CPCO Bank is incorrect and improper and the CPCO Bank cannot charge compound interest. The Cooperative Court has directed the Special Auditor and the Bank to maintain status quo as regards the recovery proceedings. He is not a member of the Managing Committee or the Loan Committee. He has not misappropriated any amount as such. Consequently, he seeks quashing of the FIR registered vide Crime No. 250/2008 against him.