PRASANNA KUMAR DAS Vs. REPUBLICOF INDIA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioner, who is a practising advocate of Bhubaneswar Bar has filed this revision application under Section 401, cr. P. C. challenging the order dated 13-10-2006 passed by the learned Special C. J. M. (CBI), Bhubaneswar, rejecting the petition filed under Sections 227 and 228, Cr. P. C. and directing framing of charge against the petitioner under Section 120-B read with section 420, I. P. C.

(2.) THE case of the prosecution, is that, accused No. 1-Manoj Kumar Ray set up a business to deal in Two-wheelers in the month of January, 1997 under the name and style M/s. Usha Auto mobiles. He opened a current account in Bank of India, ssi Branch, Bhubaneswar on 17-2-98. A couple of months thereafter he applied to the Bank for a Cash Credit Limit up to Rs. 8 lacs. The Bank while enquiring into his solvency and eligibility relied on the Valuation report submitted by accused No. 3-Tara prasad Dhal, an Architect and Proprietor of m/s. Design Group, Saheed Nagar, bhubaneswar in respect of the landed property offered by the loanee as collateral security belonging to one of the guarantors i. e. , rahas Bihari Beura. A limit up to Rs. 8 lacs was sanctioned on 18-4-98 and the amount was released even despite non-compliance by the guarantor of submitting his title deeds in respect of the properties hypothecated to the Bank as collateral security. As the transaction of the loanee was satisfactory as per the observation of the Bank, accused No. 1 applied for an enhancement of the credit limit to Rs. 35 lacs on 10-5-2000 with a request to replace another guarantor namely, pradeep Chandra Mohanty whose properties he valued at Rs. 60 lacs and enclosed xerox copies of title deeds with his application.

(3.) THIS time the Bank insisted on verification of the title deeds submitted by accused No. 1 by accused No. 2 (petitioner), its empanelled lawyer as to the marketability of the title and so also a report on the valuation of the said properties located at mouza-Badapokhari P. S. Tangi, Dist-Cuttack, Plot No. 151, Khata No. 352, measuring an area of Ac. 12. 00 dec. from accused No. 3-Tara Prasad Dhal, an Architect and Valuer in the panel. In consideration of the verification report submitted by accused no. 2 and the valuation submitted by accused No. 3; the Bank in its discretion was pleased to sanction Rs. 29 lacs in according enhancement to the credit limit. Ultimately when it was found that the conduct of the account was not satisfactory the Bank followed up with the borrower by issuing a letter to him on 3-12-2001 with copy to the guarantor i. e. , Pradeep Chandra Mohanty. When Sri Pradeep Chandra Mohanty replied back stating that he is in no way connected with the loan of M/s. Usha Automobile, further verification was made and it was found that the title deeds submitted as collateral security are forged and fabricated and someone else has impersonated Pradeep chandhra Mohanty and executed the guarantee documents in his name. The succeeding Manager reported the matter to C. B. I, which was investigated into. Upon investigation it came to light that accused No. 2 sri Prasanna Kumar Dash, an Advocate in the Bank's panel in conspiracy with accused no. 1-Manoj Kumar Ray submitted false search Report on 9-5-2000 with regard to the mortgaged property by falsely mentioning that the title deed was clear, marketable, free from encumbrances and can be mortgaged equitably and further that Sri Pradeep chandra Mohanty is the owner in possession of the schedule property after correction of the land records by Revenue Authority of Tangi, cuttack, in favour of Sri Pradeep chandra Mohanty vide Mutation Case No. 796/98. On the basis of this false report the bank of India, SSI Branch enhanced the cash Credit Limit of accused No. 1.