S K KOTHARI Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HON'ble MATHUR, J.-By way of instant petition under Section 482 Cr. P. C. , the first petitioner Shri G. K. Purohit, Chief General Manager, State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur and the second petitioner Shri S. K. Kothari, Manager (P. F. & Gratuity), State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur seeks to quash the F. I. R. No. 40/1997 Police Station Kotwali, Sriganganagar filed by the second respondent Baij Nath Garg, a dismissed employee of the Bank ("branch Manager at Wair Branch (District Bharatpur) of the Bank") for offence under Section 406 and 420 I. P. C. The petitioners have also challenged the order dated 05. 10. 1998 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Srikaranpur directing further investigation on a negative report forwarded by the police. FIRST INFORMATION REPORT :

(2.) ON 04. 02. 1997 at 10:15 AM, the second respondent Baijnath Garg submitted a written report at Police Station, Sriganganagar. It is averred that he has been dismissed by the Chief Manage (Operation) of S. B. B. J. Bank and he has challenged the said order by way of writ petition which is pending before the Rajasthan High Court, Jaipur Bench. He asked the Bank for payment of Provident Fund amount whereupon the Bank informed him that Bank's contribution towards the Provident Fund is Rs. 1,27,254. 50p and the member's contribution is Rs. 1,80,178. 50p in total Rs. 3,07,433/- for which he was required to produce an advance receipt. It is alleged that the Bank Officers by order dated 19. 07. 1995 misusing their powers sent a cheque dated 19. 07. 1995 only for a sum of Rs. 1,14,235. 15p. It was claimed that the Bank was entitled to deduct Rs. 22,386/- and Rs. 43,557. 35p out of the Bank contribution but Rs. 43,557. 35p was wrongly deducted from his contribution. Thus, by wrongful deduction and not returning his Provident Fund amount, the Bank has misappropriated his amount. It is further averred that only Rs. 14,263/- could be deducted from his contribution but the Bank has wrongly deducted Rs. 22,386/ -. The grievance has also been made with respect to the gratuity amount. It is averred that the informant is entitled to 15 months pay as gratuity to the tune of Rs. 1,57,500/- but the Bank has wrongly ordered that this amount could be realised from the money payable to the complainant and, thereafter, on 26. 06. 1996, the total amount of gratuity was ordered to be forfeited. It is claimed that the order is illegal as the authority passing the said order had no authority to realise the loss caused to the Bank. It is further averred that as the loss caused by the informant's act has not been determined and no court of law has yet found him guilty, the order of forfeiture of gratuity amount is illegal. It is submitted that the amount of Provident Fund as well as the gratuity are trust money and any adjustment of the said amount comes within the ambit of misappropriation. ON this information, police registered a case for offence under Section 420 and 406 I. P. C. and commenced the investigation. POLICE REPORT :

(3.) AS regards the Provident Fund which consists of two contributions i. e. , employer's contribution and employee's contribution is concerned, the total loss caused to the Bank determined in the departmental enquiry because of cheating and misappropriation was to the tune of Rs. 2,00,000/ -. The employers contribution available was Rs. 1,27,254. 50p and that amount was liable to be deducted. So far as the employee's contribution is concerned, a sum of Rs. 1,80,178. 50p was due to be paid. Out of which the respondent himself made an application for refund. The two recoveries were made i. e. Provident Fund Loan of Rs. 22,386/- and Housing Loan of Rs. 43,555. 35p. Nothing else was deducted from his contribution and rest of the amount was paid.