STATE BANK OF INDIA Vs. NAKUL D KAMANI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS revision application is directed against the order dated 5. -2 -1990, passed by the learned Sub -Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Jamshedpur, in C -l Case No.2 of 1988/ T.R. No. 1786 of 1989, by which the learned Magistrate in exercise of his power under Sec. 245 of the Code of Criminal Procedure thereinafter referred to as the Code has discharged the accused -opposite party from the charges under Secs. 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) IT appears that a complaint petition was filed by the complainant petitioner against the accusedopposite party for an offence under Secs. 420 and 468 of the Indian Penal Code alleging therein, inter alia, that accused -opposite party Nakul D. Kamani was the Chairman -cum -Managing Director of Friends Press Metal Private Ltd. and in such capacity he took over charge from Mrs. Saraswati Devi on 2 -6 -1986. The accused was authorised by a resolution of the said concern to operate all the Bank Accounts of the Company, which was in the State Bank of India, Bintupur Branch Jamshedpur. The accused started operating all the accounts of the Company in the Bank, as he was also major shareholder of the Company. On 15 -5 -1987 the complainant -petitioner received a letter from one P. Guha Thakurta. General Manager -cum -Director of the Friends Press Metal Pvt. Ltd., along with the copy of resolution of the Company from which it was gathered that the accused had resigned from the Board of Directors of the said Company and also from the post of Chairman -cum -Managing Director with effect from 6 -4 -1987 and his power to operate the Bank Accounts was also revoked and the same was delegated upon P. Guha Thakurta. It is further alleged that the copy of the said resolution was deliberately not sent to the complainant with an ulterior motive and in the meantime the accusedopposite party managed to withdraw a sum of Rs. 4,13,481,80 paise from the Cash Credit Account of the Company by issuing nine cheques. Again the accused even knowing that he was not the Managing Director of the Company signed and issued cheques on 8. -4 -1987.10 -4 -1987 and 11 -4 -1987 and operated the Account of the Bank and withdraw a sum of Rs. 14,383,80 paise. Rs. 15,000.00 and Rs. 10,000.00 respectively, from the Cash Credit Account. Again on 10 -4 -1987 after antedating Cheque No. 111017 the accused -opposite party withdraw a large amount of Rs. 2.95,000.00 It is further alleged that though the accused was not authorised to operate the Bank Account, he presented a number of bills for its purchase by the complainant and on 11 -4 -1987 and 13 -4 -1987, the complainant -Bank in good faith purchased the bills and had paid two sums of Rs. 20.841.36 paise and Rs. 51,362,20P. Which was 90% of the bills amount of the Company of the accused and thus the accused opposite party dishonestly and fraudulently cheated the complainant -Bank by suppressing the resolution of the Company, by which he was not entitled to operate the Bank Accounts. Thus the accused -opposite party for wrongful loss and wrongful gain committed an offence of forgery, as the complainant Bank has suffered substantial financial loss because of the deceptive role played by the accused -opposite party.

(3.) PURSUANT to the complaint, the complainant was examined on solemn affirmation and cognizance of the offence was taken by the learned Magistrate and processes were issued to the accused -opposite party, who appeared before the learned Magistrate and filed a petition for his discharge from the case. The prosecution examined as many as five witnesses before framing of the charge. The learned Magistrate considering the petition filed by the accused opposite party and also the evidence on record passed the impugned order discharging the accused -opposite Party in purported exercise of its power under Sec. 243 of the Code.