INDER MOHAN PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the Code) relates to quashment of criminal proceedings initiated against the petitioner on the basis of first information report, lodged by the petitioner himself on 18th August, 1987 and the order of the trial Court dated 19th November, 1988, whereby charge under Sections 409 and 182 of the Indian Penal Code was framed against him.

(2.) IN brief, the facts relevant for the disposal of this case are that the petitioner, while posted as Manager of the Punjab and Sind Bank Branch of Bathinda (for short referred to as 'the Bank'), got a case registered with the Police vide his letter dated 18th August, 1987. According to the allegations in the first information report, M/s. Oriental Motors, Bathinda, through its partner Dilbhajan Singh, had been availing of credit facilities, i.e.,hypothecation limit of 70 lacs and letter of credit limit of Rs. 80 lacs, from the Bank. In consideration of said facilities, Dilbhajan Singh, as partner of the said firm, executed security documents, and also created equitable mortgage in respect of his various properties at Bathinda and Sriganganagar as well as pledged F.D.Rs. for Rs. 8 lacs in the names of partners of the said firm, and letters of credit and negotiated documents worth Rs. 1,17,432 were also pledged with the said Bank. All these security documents concerning the aforesaid facilities provided to the said firm along with other security documents were kept in filing cabinet lying in strong room of the Bank, as per routine. It was further alleged that on 17th August, 1987, when the petitioner wanted to see those documents, for preparing statements of letters of credit, it was found that all the security documents, regarding the said credit facilities, and title deeds were missing, and the filing cabinet seemed to have been mishandled by some miscreants. According to the petitioner, some unknown person, in order to cause loss to the Bank, had stolen all the security documents from the Bank premises.

(3.) IT was mainly contended on behalf of the petitioner that the petitioner was falsely involved in this case by the local Police, who was under the influence of Dilbhajan Singh, partner of the said firm; that the case was reinvestigated by Shri S.K. Sharma, Superintendent of Police (Detective), Bathinda, who, in his detailed report mentioned that there was no evidence to implicate the petitioner, but the case against him was not withdrawn.