PUNJAB NATIONAL BANK Vs. SURENDRA PRASAD SINHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SPECIAL leave granted.

(2.) THOUGH the respondent was served on July 29, 1991, neither appeared in person, nor through counsel. The facts set out in the complaint eloquently manifests on its, face a clear abuse of the process of the Court to harass the appellants. The respondent, an Advocate and Standing Counsel for the first appellant filed a private complaint in the Court of Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Katni in C.c. No. 933/91 for offences under S. 409 and Ss. 109/114 I.P.C. The facts stated in the complaint run thus:

(3.) THE security bond, admittedly, executed by the respondent reads the material parts thus: "We confirm having handed over to you by way of security against your branch office Katni F.D. Account No. 77/83 dated November 1, 1983 for Rs. 24,000/ - in the event of renewal of the said Fixed Deposit Receipt as security for the above loan." "We confirm... the F.D.R. will continue to remain with the bank as security here". "The amount -due and other charges, if any, be adjusted and appropriated by you from the proceeds 'of the said F.D.R. at any time before, or on its maturity. at your discretion, unless the loan is otherwise fully adjusted from the dues on demand in writing made by you.." "We give the bank right to credit the balance to our saving banks account or any other amount and adjust the amount due from the borrowers out of the -same". "We authorise you and confirm that the F.D.R. pledged as security for the said loan shall also be security including the surplus proceeds thereof for any other liability and the obligation of person and further in favour of the bank and the bank shall be entitled to retain/realise/utilise/ appropriate the same without reference to us.'