GHULAM MUSTAFFA KHATEEB Vs. MASOODA AMIN AND OTHERS

JUDGEMENT

(1.) A clutch of these petitions circles the complaint preferred by the respondent no.1 against the petitioners and proceedings emanated therefrom. Impugned, therefore, in the petitions on hand, mooted under Section 561-A of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.), are the orders dated 12.03.2015, 22.08.2015 and 25.04.2016, passed by the learned 1st Additional Munsiff, Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Srinagar (for brevity the "Trial Magistrate"), and quashment of the complaint titled Masooda Amin v. Mustaffa Khateeb and others, is as well implored for by the petitioners.

(2.) The case set up by the petitioners in all these petitions is that Bajaj Allianz General Insurance Company (for short the "company") is a Private Insurance Company, incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The company conducts its business of the insurance in India, based on a certificate of the registration issued by the Insurance Regulatory Development Authority (IRDA). The petitioners claim that they have been in the service of the company in the different capacities and at the different positions. Respondent no.1, it is averred, came to be appointed in the company as Junior Executive Claims vide order dated 25.02008 and subsequently elevated as Executive Claims in the year 2010. She was thereafter redesignated as Executive Sales (Trainings) vide order dated 18.01.2014. In September 2014, the unprecedented floods hit the State of J & K in general and the Valley in particular, causing immense loss and damage through the length and breadth of the Valley. It is claimed that the company since have had the huge insurance business in the Valley, as such, it rose to the occasion aiming at to extend the help and support to the insured, opened various extension counters/makeshift offices, including one at Nallamar Road, Srinagar, for receiving intimations and settling the insurance claims of the insured. It is maintained by the petitioners that the aforesaid exercise, however, did in no way authorise or empower any of the officers/employees of the company to deviate from the settled process, procedure and norms, while entertaining and settling the claims of the insured. Entertaining the claim forms intimations and allocating/ forwarding the same to the Surveyors had been the job assigned to the particular officers/employees. The respondent no.1, however, have had not been assigned any kind of such job, in that the respondent no.1 during that period had been holding the position of the Executive Operations assigned to her in terms of order dated 10.06.2014. The respondent no.1 had no role either to allocate or to forward the registered claims of the insurance to any of the surveyors.

(3.) It is next averred that during the said floods the head office of the company situated at Karan Nagar, Srinagar, even did not remain immune from the floods and the respondent no.1, taking the undue advantage of the said situation, have had started accepting and entertaining the claim forms from the insured and without any competence, power and the authority allocating and forwarding the same to one Mr Adil, working with the Panel Surveyor of the company, namely, M/s G.N.Teeli. the said unauthorised and illegal act of omission and commission resulted in huge losses to the company inasmuch as on the various occasions unpleasant situation for the company before this Court, which was monitoring the settlement of insurance cases at that relevant point of time. The said acts of the respondent no.1, according to the petitioners, surfaced during the month of November-December 2014, when an inhouse fact finding inquiry was conducted and as a consequence whereof, cognisance was taken by the officers of the company and show cause notice was issued to the respondent no.1 and she was placed under suspension vide letter dated 30.12.2014. An explanation was sought from the respondent no.1 for the acts of omission and commission committed by the respondent no.1. The notice was responded to by the respondent no.1. It is asserted that the company ultimately after considering the entire matter and material relating to the acts of omission and commission committed by the respondent no.1, which also consisted of her voluntary admission/confession, decided to terminate the services of the respondent no.1 and consequently issued an order of termination dated 002015. Thereagainst, the respondent no.1 filed a Civil Suit before the court of the learned 1st Additional Munsiff, Srinagar, and earned an interim relief in her favour in an application for interim relief. The said suit came to be contested by the company and on consideration of the written statement as also objections, so filed by the company, the learned 1st Additional Munsiff, Srinagar, vide order dated 25.04.2016, vacated the interim order. It is contended that the respondent no.1, prior to the institution of the aforesaid civil suit, had filed a Criminal Complaint against the petitioners, alleging commission of offences punishable under Section 341, 348, 354, 506 and 509 of Ranbir Penal Code (RPC). The petitioners contend that they came to know that an inquiry was conducted on the said complaint of the respondent no.1, by the police station Karan Nagar, and the statement of the petitioners was recorded during the course of the said inquiry by the Inquiry Officer, besides the statement of the other officers of the company posted in the same office viz. Karan Nagar, Srinagar, where the respondent no.1 had been working.