UTTAM KUMAR MONDAL Vs. STATE OF WEST BENGAL

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this revisional application the petitioner has assailed the order dated 07.6.2018 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda in Case No. 955C/17 thereby disposing of the petitioner's application filed under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) The brief facts leading to the instant case is that the petitioner is an account holder with the State Bank of India, Kaliachak Branch and is having a savings account bearing Account No. 11892090084. On 08.07.2017, at about 4:20 p.m. the petitioner with the intention to withdraw money from his account, visited the nearest Automated Teller Machine (ATM) at the Kaliachak Branch of the respondent bank by inserted his ATM card in the machine to withdraw the cash of Rs.30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) but unfortunately the petitioner was unaware of the fact that the said machine was out of order and so the transaction became unsuccessful and the petitioner could not withdraw the said cash. Guard attending to the ATM kiosk, told the petitioner that the said machine did not have cash and the petitioner was asked to withdraw cash from the adjacent ATM. Accordingly, the petitioner once again inserted his ATM card in an adjacent ATM machine and withdraw a sum of Rs 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) but to his shocking dismay, the petitioner after seeing the 'receipt came to learn that an amount to the tune of Rs 40,000/- (Rupees Forty Thousand only) was deducted from the petitioner's account which included the sum of Rs 30,000/- (Rupees Thirty Thousand only) due to malfunctioning of the machine. Thereafter, the issue was brought to the notice of the bank but the bank was not taking up his issue with seriously. So, the petitioner without further ado, on 17.07.2017 wrote a letter to the opposite party no. 2 bringing to his notice regarding the irregular deduction of cash from the petitioner's account. The opposite party no.2 did not pay heed to the said letter. So, the petitioner lodged a complaint with Baishnabnagar Police Station which complaint was diarized as G.D. Entry No. 1012/17 dated 18.7.2017. Seeing the lackadaisical approach of the police authorities is not acting upon the petitioner's complaint, a representation was made to Superintendent of Police, Malda requesting him to take appropriate action by directing his subordinates on 25.9.2017, but of no effect. On 13.9.2017 the petitioner sent a notice to the opposite party no. 2, requesting for his assistance in resolving the petitioner's grievance since the petitioner had incurred monetary loss for no wrong of his but shockingly, instead of helping the petitioner and alleging that the petitioner had distorted the facts for his wrongful pecuniary gain.

(3.) Inaction on the part of the police authorities and non-cooperation of the opposite party no. 2 to help the petitioner compelled the petitioner to file an application under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda which was registered as a Case No. 955C/2017 dated 25.9.2017, the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda by order dated 10.10.2017 directed the Sub-Inspector of Kaliachak Police Station to treat the petition under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure as a formal FIR. On 28.3.2018 Sub-Inspector of Kaliachak Police Station, Malda submitted his enquiry report in terms of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and the report was submitted from guard that the bank authorities had stated that the ATM transaction money is deducted because of the fault in the machine are subsequently credited again. It can be seen from the report that the bank officials had stated before the police that the sum deducted had already been credited to his account whereas to the contrary the transaction details of the petitioner's account which was obtained from the bank by the police does not show any reflection of the amount of Rs. 30,000/- having been credited as on the date. When the bank was approached by the police for recovery of the CCTV footage, peculiarly it has been stated by the bank personnel that same was not available as the only the footage for last three months was available. It is pertinent to mention here that the petitioner subsequently filed objection against the police report on 11.5.2018. On the basis of the police report in terms of Section 202 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Malda disposed of the application being Case No. 955C/17 vide order dated 07.6.2018 which has been challenged in this revisional application on the ground that the impugned order is a glaring example of non-application of judicial mind as the police report dated 23.8.2018, it has been reported that no sum was ever credited to the account of the petitioner.