MAHESH PRASAD MANJHI Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE petitioners seek quashing of the order of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Darbhanga dated 29.2.1998 taking cognizance of the offence under Section 406, IPC against them in Laheriasarai P. S. Case No. 25/90.

(2.) THE prosecution case instituted on the complaint of the Branch Manager of the Bihar State Financial Corporation, Mithila Branch (in short, the Corporation) is as follows : The Corporation, a statutory body created under the State Financial Corporations Act, 1951, advanced loan of Rs. 8.83 lacs out of sanctioned loan of 10.01 lacs to M/s Hotel Anupam, Bakarganj, Laherisarai through its partners Mahesh Manjhi and Vijay Kumar Manjhi (petitioners herein) after completing the necessary legal formalities. The assets in question where hypothecated in favour of the Corporation. As the loan was not liquidated, the Unit including the entire mortgaged assets were put on sale under Sections 29 and 30 of the State Financial Corporation Act and ultimately sold to one Shri Shankar Prasad Gupta. At the stage of making over possession of the unit to the said purchaser, in course of preparation of the inventory in presence of an Executive Magistrate, it transpired that the mortgaged assets like wooden furniture and fixtures, Ceiling fans, 10 K.V.A. Kirloskar -make D. S. Set and various other items of sanitary wares, electric fittings, mirrors, etc. had been removed by the said partners without the knowledge of the Corporation and/or its officials. In fact, even the window fittings had been removed and walls raised in their place.

(3.) THE Police submitted final report opining that loss of the Corporation could be recovered though civil suit and the liability of the accused was, therefore, civil in nature. The Chief Judicial Magistrate disagreeing with the report took cognizance by the impugned order. He held that the fact that dues could be recovered through civil suit does not mean that the accused cannot be criminally liable.