VEDURUMUDI RAMA RAO Vs. CHENNURI VENKAT RAO

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By this application under Section 482, Cr.P.C. the petitioner V. Rama Rao is challenging the proceedings initiated against him under Section 500, I.P.C. by the 1st respondent herein in C.C. No. 114/92 on the file of the III Addl. Metropolitan Magistrate, Visakhapatnam.

(2.) The 1st respondent, Chennuri Venkat Rao, filed a private complaint in C.C. No. 114/92 alleging that he hails from a respectable family at Srikakulam, that he is doing business in transport, that he developed good rapport with different sections of society including financial institutions, that he obtained loan facilities form Gajuwaka branch of Andhra Bank, that the loan amounts obtained by him were properly utilised for the purpose for which they were granted to the knowledge of all concerned in the bank including the petitioner/accused, who was working as Regional Manager Andhra Bank, Visakhapatnam at that time. It is further alleged in the complaint that the accused issued the circular dated 21-8-1990 to all the branches of Andhra Bank, Visakhapatnam region under his signature to the effect that the complainant cheated Gajuwaka branch of Andhra Bank to a tune of Rs. five lakhs under four accounts and that the chances of recovery from him are bleak and that the complainant attempted to cheat Dwarkanagar, Maharanipet and Port branches of Andhra Bank and that a reading of the said Circular give an impression as if the complainant is a part and privy of team of gangsters and the said allegations amount to defamatory and the accused committed an offence punishable under Section 500, I.P.C.

(3.) In the present application, the learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the Vigilance Department, Central Office, Hyderabad, in its letter dated 20-7-1990 addressed to the Zonal Office Andhra Bank, Visakhapatnam instructed the Zonal Office to issue a confidential Circular to the local branches in Visakhapatnam informing the prominent activities of four named persons including the complainant, that in pursuance of the said Circular, the Zonal Office, Visakhapatnam by its letter dated 26-7-1990 addressed to the Regional Office, Visakhapatnam instructed the Regional Manager i.e. the petitioner herein to issue instructions to all the branches under his jurisdiction to be very careful and vigilant in dealing with the above named persons including the complainant by issuing a confidential circular. In pursuance of the said instructions, the petitioner herein who was working as Regional Manager at that time issued the Confidential Circular, dated 21-8-1990, directing all the Managers of Andhra Bank in the Region to be very careful and vigilant in dealing with the persons named in that circular and this confidential letter was issued in his capacity as the Regional Manager and as per the instructions of the Central Office and Zonal Office to alert the Managers of Andhra Bank to safeguard the interest of the Bank. It is also averred in the petition that even all the allegations in the complaint are taken as true, still the offence under Section 500, I.P.C. is not made out in asmuch as exceptions 9 and 10 are squarely attracted.