High Court

Case No. 14221 of 2024 (State Vs. Pankaj Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 547 of 2023, under Sections - 420, 409, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Kasganj, District - Kasganj, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and no prima facie case is made out against him. Applicant was working as Branch Manager of H.D.B. Financial Services Limited. The allegation that applicant misappropriated the funds, which were deposited by the borrowers in the bank to re-pay their loans, is false. In fact the no objection certificate had already been issued in favour of the borrower Gyan Singh and Jitendra Singh. The police have not investigated the matter properly and that dispute between the parties is civil in nature. In support of his contention, learned counsel has referred case of Mitesh Kumar J. Sha Vs. The State of Karnataka & Ors. AIRONLINE 2021 SC 936 and Randheer Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 932 of 2021), decided on

02.09.2021 and submitted that the dispute is civil in nature and no prima facie case is made out against applicant.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of the allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, a prima facie case is made out against applicant.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

6. The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgement reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.

7. In case of Mitesh Kumar J. Sha (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :- " 44. Furthermore, in the landmark judgment of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors. 9 regarding exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of CrPC, this Court has laid down following categories of instances wherein inherent powers of the can be exercised in order to secure the ends of justice. These are :- "(1) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused; (2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code; (3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused; (4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code; (5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused; "

8. In case of Randheer Singh (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :- "33. In this case, it appears that criminal proceedings are being taken recourse to as a weapon of harassment against a purchaser. It is reiterated at the cost of repetition that the FIR does not disclose any offence so far as the Appellant is concerned. There is no whisper of how and in what manner, this Appellant is involved in any criminal offence and the charge sheet, the relevant part whereof has been extracted above, is absolutely vague. There can be no doubt that jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 should be used sparingly for the purpose of preventing abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Whether a complaint discloses criminal offence or not depends on the nature of the allegation and whether the essential ingredients of a criminal offence are present or not has to be judged by the High Court. There can be no doubt that a complaint disclosing civil transactions may also have a criminal texture. The High Court has, however, to see whether the dispute of a civil nature has been given colour of criminal offence. In such a situation, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings as held by this Court in Paramjeet Batra (supra) extracted above."

9. In the instant matter, perusal of record shows that applicant was working as Branch Manager of H.D.B. Financial Services Limited. The first information report has been lodged by the Area Operation Manager of the said bank. There is allegation against applicant that whenever the borrowers used to deposit amount in the said Branch to repay their loan amount, the said amount has been kept by the applicant with himself and did not deposit in the bank and the amount was misappropriated. By using the same modus operadi the applicant has misappropriated an amount of Rs. 6,31,033/- belonging to the bank. In view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that dispute between the parties is civil in nature. In case of Randheer Singh (supra), it was held that only because civil remedy is available it may not be a ground to quash criminal proceedings. In view of specific allegations made against applicant and material collected during investigation, the aforesaid case laws do not provide any help to the applicant. Considering the material on record, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against applicant. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact, which may adequately be discerned / adjudicated only by the Trial court. Even the submissions made on point of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.

10. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned first information report and materials on record, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed.

11. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 S Rawat

Case No. 14221 of 2024 (State Vs. Pankaj Kumar), arising out of Case Crime No. 547 of 2023, under Sections - 420, 409, 504 I.P.C., Police Station - Kasganj, District - Kasganj, pending in the court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Kasganj.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for applicant that applicant is innocent and no prima facie case is made out against him. Applicant was working as Branch Manager of H.D.B. Financial Services Limited. The allegation that applicant misappropriated the funds, which were deposited by the borrowers in the bank to re-pay their loans, is false. In fact the no objection certificate had already been issued in favour of the borrower Gyan Singh and Jitendra Singh. The police have not investigated the matter properly and that dispute between the parties is civil in nature. In support of his contention, learned counsel has referred case of Mitesh Kumar J. Sha Vs. The State of Karnataka & Ors. AIRONLINE 2021 SC 936 and Randheer Singh Vs. State of U.P. & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 932 of 2021), decided on

02.09.2021 and submitted that the dispute is civil in nature and no prima facie case is made out against applicant.

4. Learned A.G.A. has opposed the application and submitted that in view of the allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, a prima facie case is made out against applicant.

5. I have considered the rival submissions and perused the record.

6. The legal position on the issue of quashing of criminal proceedings is well-settled that the jurisdiction to quash a complaint, FIR or a charge-sheet should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases. However, where the allegations made in the FIR or the complaint and material on record even if taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused, the charge-sheet may be quashed in exercise of inherent powers under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. In well celebrated judgement reported in AIR 1992 SC 605 State of Haryana and others Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal, Supreme Court has carved out certain guidelines, wherein FIR or proceedings may be quashed but cautioned that the power to quash FIR or proceedings should be exercised sparingly and that too in the rarest of rare cases.

7. In case of Mitesh Kumar J. Sha (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :- " 44. Furthermore, in the landmark judgment of State of Haryana & Ors. Vs. Ch. Bhajan Lal and Ors. 9 regarding exercise of inherent powers under section 482 of CrPC, this Court has laid down following categories of instances wherein inherent powers of the can be exercised in order to secure the ends of justice. These are :- "(1) where the allegations made in the First Information Report or the complaint, even if they are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any offence or make out a case against the accused; (2) where the allegations in the First Information Report and other materials, if any, accompanying the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by police officers under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code; (3) where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or 'complaint and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out a case against the accused; (4) where the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code; (5) where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused; "

8. In case of Randheer Singh (supra), the Hon'ble Apex Court has held as under :- "33. In this case, it appears that criminal proceedings are being taken recourse to as a weapon of harassment against a purchaser. It is reiterated at the cost of repetition that the FIR does not disclose any offence so far as the Appellant is concerned. There is no whisper of how and in what manner, this Appellant is involved in any criminal offence and the charge sheet, the relevant part whereof has been extracted above, is absolutely vague. There can be no doubt that jurisdiction under section 482 of the Cr.P.C., 1973 should be used sparingly for the purpose of preventing abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice. Whether a complaint discloses criminal offence or not depends on the nature of the allegation and whether the essential ingredients of a criminal offence are present or not has to be judged by the High Court. There can be no doubt that a complaint disclosing civil transactions may also have a criminal texture. The High Court has, however, to see whether the dispute of a civil nature has been given colour of criminal offence. In such a situation, the High Court should not hesitate to quash the criminal proceedings as held by this Court in Paramjeet Batra (supra) extracted above."

9. In the instant matter, perusal of record shows that applicant was working as Branch Manager of H.D.B. Financial Services Limited. The first information report has been lodged by the Area Operation Manager of the said bank. There is allegation against applicant that whenever the borrowers used to deposit amount in the said Branch to repay their loan amount, the said amount has been kept by the applicant with himself and did not deposit in the bank and the amount was misappropriated. By using the same modus operadi the applicant has misappropriated an amount of Rs. 6,31,033/- belonging to the bank. In view of allegations made in the first information report and material collected during investigation, it cannot be said that dispute between the parties is civil in nature. In case of Randheer Singh (supra), it was held that only because civil remedy is available it may not be a ground to quash criminal proceedings. In view of specific allegations made against applicant and material collected during investigation, the aforesaid case laws do not provide any help to the applicant. Considering the material on record, it cannot be said that no prima facie case is made out against applicant. The submissions raised by learned counsel for the applicants call for determination on questions of fact, which may adequately be discerned / adjudicated only by the Trial court. Even the submissions made on point of law can also be more appropriately gone into by the trial court. Adjudication of questions of facts and appreciation of evidence or examining the reliability and credibility of the version, does not fall within the arena of jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS.

10. After considering arguments raised by learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned first information report and materials on record, no case for quashing of impugned proceedings is made out. The application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merits and thus, liable to be dismissed.

11. Accordingly, the application u/s 528 BNSS is dismissed. Order Date :- 3.7.2025 S Rawat