State of
U.P. Through C.B.I. S.P.E. Lucknow Vs.
R.K. Srivastava & Anr [1989] INSC 241 (11 August 1989)
Dutt,
M.M. (J) Dutt, M.M. (J) Pandian, S.R. (J) Thommen, T.K. (J)
CITATION:
1989 AIR 2222 1989 SCR (3) 834 1989 SCC (4) 59 JT 1989 (3) 347 1989 SCALE (2)262
CITATOR
INFO : RF 1992 SC 604 (107) D 1992 SC1930 (3,5)
ACT:
Criminal
Procedure Code, 1973: Section 154---F.l.R.--Allegations contained in FIR taken
on face value and accepted in entirety do not constitute offence--Whether
criminal proceedings could be quashed.
HEAD NOTE:
The
respondents, two employees of a nationalised Bank and two account-holders, were
charged with offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 468, 471 I.P.C. and
5(2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The
F.I.R. alleged that the two Bank employees entered into a criminal conspiracy
with the two account-holders to cheat the Bank and, in pursuance thereof an
amount of Rs.54,600 was allowed to be withdrawn by the account-holders, who had
tendered three cheques aggregating to Rs.54,600, on the basis of the false
credit entries in the books of accounts of the Bank, and connected credit and
debit-vouchers were also prepared. The case against one of the account-holders
was later dropped.
The
High Court quashed the proceedings only against Respondent No. 1 on the ground
that the allegations made in the F.I.R. did not constitute any offence of
cheating or forgery. Against this decision, the State as well as the Bank filed
appeals in this Court.
Quashing
the proceedings against all the respondents,
HELD:
1. If the allegations made in the FIR taken at their face value and accepted in
their entirety do not constitute an offence, the criminal proceedings
instituted on the basis of such FIR should be quashed. [837C] In the instant
case, the Respondent No. 1 and the other accused had accepted the three cheques
in question and sent the same for clearance after debiting the LOC account. The
cheques were encashed and the money was received by the Bank. It may be that
there was some delay in crediting the LOC account or that the money against the
three 835 cheques were credited in the accounts of the account-holders, but the
allegations made either in the FIR or in the charge-sheet do not show that they
had acted dishonestly, or with deliberate intention to cause wrongful gain or
wrongful loss to the Bank. When the amount was allowed to be withdrawn by the
account-holders, necessary entries had to be made in the accounts of the Bank
and these entries cannot be characterised as false. No document has been
referred to in the FIR as the outcome of forgery. [837E-F, 838A] The High Court
was, therefore, right in holding that the allegations made in the FIR did not
constitute any offence of cheating or forgery and that as the criminal
proceedings had been started on the basis of a FIR which did not contain any
definite accusation and it amounted to an abuse of process of the Court, they
were liable to be quashed. [837G, 838B] Since the allegations in the FIR are
the same against all the accused persons, the entire proceedings as against all
the accused persons should be quashed. Accordingly, the entire criminal
proceedings are quashed. [838C]
CRIMINAL
APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal Nos. 380 of 1989 and 323 of 1988.
From
the Judgment and Order dated 28.1.1988 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl.
Misc. Appln. No. 995 of 1987.
G. Ramaswamy,
Additional Solicitor General, Anil Dev Singh, Miss A. Subhashini and R.P. Kapur
for the Appellants.
R.L. Kohli,
Manoj Saxena and R.D. Upadhyay for the Respondents.
The
Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT, J. These two appeals by special
leave, one preferred by the State of U .P. and the other by the State Bank of
India, are directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court whereby
the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings being Crime Case No. 40 of
1983 in the Court of Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, only as against the
respondent R.K. Srivastava. In quashing the proceedings in the exercise of its
jurisdiction under section 482 Cr. P.C., the High Court took the view that
allegations made in the First Information Report 836 (FIR) did not constitute
any offence. In order to appreciate the view of the High Court, it is necessary
to refer to the FIR which reads as follows:
"An
information has been received that Shri P.C. Saxena and Shri Ram Kumar Srivastava
while posted and functioning as Accountant and Clerk-cum-Godown Keeper in the
State Bank of India, Agriculture Development Branch, Budaun,
respectively entered into a criminal conspiracy with Shri Sarwant Singh and his
wife Smt. Rajwant Kaur, Props. of M/s. National Mill Store, Budaun, during the
month of June, 1982 to cheat the State Bank of India, Budaun, and in pursuance
of the said criminal conspiracy an.amount of Rs.54,600' was withdrawn on the
basis of false credit entry made in the books of accounts of the Bank and
connected credit and debit vouchers were also prepared and passed by the
accused employees of the Bank and payment were made to the accused persons,
namely, Shri Sarwant Singh and Smt. Rajwant Kaur who tendered cheque No. 348459
dated 2.5. 1982 for Rs.18,600 cheque No. 348482 for Rs. 19,200, date 2.6. 1982
and cheque No. 502206 dated 2.6.82 for Rs. 16,800 = 54,600.
The
above facts constitute offence punishable u/s 120-B, 420, 468,471 I.P.C. and
5(2) r/w 5(1)(d) of PC Act, 1947.
A
regular case is therefore registered and its investigation is entrusted to Shri
V.P. Arya, Inspector of this establishment." According to the FIR, as
against three cheques of the aggregate amount of Rs.54,600, presumably of three
different Banks, a credit entry was made in the accounts of M/s. National Mill
Stores Co., Budaun, and M/s. New Manufacturing Co., Budaun, and their partners,
Sardar Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt. Rajwant Kaur, in the State Bank of India
and the said sum of Rs.54,600 was allowed to be withdrawn by them by the
respondent and the accused P.C. Saxena.
The
allegations in the FIR appear to be vague and although it is alleged that the
respondent and the accused P.C. Saxena made false credit entries in the books
of accounts of the Bank and connected credit and debit vouchers were also
prepared and passed by them, no 837 particulars of the same have been given. It
appears from the chargesheet that the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt.
Rajwant Kaur and their firms, namely, M/s. National Mill Stores Co., Budaun,
and M/s. New ManufaCturing Co., Budaun, have current accounts in the State Bank
of India, Budaun. After the said three cheques
amounting to Rs.54,600 were tendered, the respondent and the accused P.C. Saxena
sent the said cheques for clearance and allowed the said Shri Sarwant Singh and
his wife Smt. Rajwant Kaur to withdraw the sum of Rs. 54,600 from their current
account.
It is
now a well settled principle of law that if the allegations made in the FIR are
taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute an
offence, the criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such FIR should be
quashed. In the instant case, on the basis of the said FIR the respondent and
the said P.C. Saxena and Shri Sarwant Singh were charged under sections 120-B,
420, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and section 5(2) read with section 5(1)(d) of the
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. According to the appellant, as no prima
facie case was made out against Smt. Rajwant Kaur, wife of Shri Sarwant Singh,
she has been dropped from the array of the accused persons.
The
question is whether the facts disclosed in the FIR constitute the offences with
which the accused have been charged. It is manifestly clear from the
allegations in the FIR that the respondent or the other accused had no
intention whatsoever to make any wrongful gain or to make any wrongful loss to
the Bank. They had accepted the said three cheques amounting to Rs.54,600 and
sent the same for clearance after debiting the LOC account. The said cheques
have been encashed and the money was received by the State Bank of India. It may be that there was some
delay in crediting the LOC account or that the money against the three cheques
were credited in the accounts of the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife, but
the allegations made either in the FIR or in the charge-sheet do not show that
the respondent and the said P.C. Saxena had acted dishonestly, that is to say,
acted with a deliberate intention to cause wrongful gain or wrongful loss. In
our opinion, the High Court has rightly held that the allegations made in the
FIR do not constitute any offence of cheating, nor do they constitute any offence
of forgery. It is true that it has been alleged that the said sum of Rs.54,600
was withdrawn on the basis of false credit entries made in the books of
accounts of the Bank and connected credit and debit vouchers were also prepared
and passed by the respondent and the other accused. When the said sum of
Rs.54,600 838 had been allowed to be withdrawn by the said Shri Sarwant Singh
and his wife, necessary entries had to be made in the books of accounts, but it
is not understandable how these entries can be characterised as false entries.
No document has been referred to in the FIR as the outcome of forgery.
The
High Court has rightly held that as the criminal proceedings have been started
against the respondent on the basis of a FIR which does not contain any
definite accusation, it amounts to an abuse of process of the court and, as
such, is liable to be quashed. We entirely agree with the view expressed by the
High Court.
The
High Court has quashed the proceedings only as against the respondent No. 1,
R.K. Srivastava. In our opinion, when the allegations in the FIR are the same
against all the accused persons, the entire proceedings as against all the
accused persons including the said P.C. Saxena and the said Shri Satwant Singh
should be quashed.
Accordingly,
while we uphold the judgment of the High Court, we quash the entire criminal
proceedings being Crime Case No. 40 of 1983 also as against the accused P.C. Saxena
and Shri Sarwant Singh. The appeals are disposed of as above.
N.P.V.
Appeals disposed of.
Back