TMI Blog2013 (10) TMI 1427X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... debt which was due to the Bank was recovered by the Bank with an order passed by Debts Recovery Tribunal. Therefore, it cannot be said that there is a compromise between the offender and the victim. The offences when committed in relation with Banking activities including offences under Sections 420/471 IPC have harmful effect on the public and threaten the well being of the society. These offences fall under the category of offences involving moral turpitude committed by public servants while working in that capacity. Further it may be claimed that the bank is the victim in such cases but, actually, the society including Bank's customers are infirm. There was neither an allegation regarding any abuse of process of any Court nor anything on record to suggest that the offenders were entitled to secure the order in the ends of justice. Decision in the case of GIAN SINGH VERSUS STATE OF PUNJAB AND ANR [ 2010 (11) TMI 1058 - SUPREME COURT] was followed. In the instant case, the High Court did not consider the above factors while passing the impugned order. Hence, Supreme Court was of opinion that the High Court has erred in addressing the issue in right perspective. - CRIM ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pectively) without proper verification, documentation and by manipulating exorbitant price of the collateral properties offered by M/s. Tag Reachers (P) Ltd. 5. The said information has also disclosed that when M/s. Tag Reachers (P) Ltd. started defaulting the repayment in the aforesaid term loan accounts, the accused persons connived together and in pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy Shri Jagjit Singh as Director of M/s. Tag Reachers (P) Ltd. approached Shri Sanjib Kumar Chatterjee, Sr. Manager in the month of March, 2000 for a demand loan of ₹ 32.50 lakhs against the security of National Saving Certificate/Kishan Vikash Patra of the face value of ₹ 50 lakhs. The said securities were in the form of NSC for ₹ 7 lakhs and Kishan Vikash Patra of ₹ 18 lakhs standing in the name of the aforesaid Shri Raj Kumar Aggarwal and Kishan Vikash Patra of ₹ 25 lakhs standing in the name of the aforesaid Shri Virendra Jain. All the NSCs and KVPs were alleged to be forged and fabricated and were not issued from the Middleton Row and Park Street Post Offices from where they were shown to have been reportedly purchased. Similarly, no lien on them in favour of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nal the respondent, Jagjit Singh moved an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. in C.R.R. No.719 of 2010 before the Calcutta High Court for quashing the proceedings being G.R. Case No.1508 of 2006. 10. From the impugned order, it would be evident that in view of such amicable settlement made between the respondent and the Bank officials, learned Judge of the High Court by the impugned order set aside the criminal proceedings with the following observation: Be that as it may, there cannot be any rigid formula in regard to permitting the parties to effect a compromise. The offences alleged are undoubtedly non-compoundable and certainly, of serious nature. The question that arises whether in view of such amiable settlement between the parties, any fruitful purpose is likely to be served by allowing the criminal proceedings to proceed further. In the present case, as indicated earlier and that too, being rightly shown by the learned senior counsel, Mr. De, for reasons not known, the principal accused, Sanjib Kumar Chatterjee, had been left out. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, I am inclined to hold that further proceedings of the case before the learned tria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e position that emerges from the above discussion can be summarised thus: the power of the High Court in quashing a criminal proceeding or FIR or complaint in exercise of its inherent jurisdiction is distinct and different from the power given to a criminal court for compounding the offences under Section 320 of the Code. Inherent power is of wide plenitude with no statutory limitation but it has to be exercised in accord with the guideline engrafted in such power viz.: (i) to secure the ends of justice, or (ii) to prevent abuse of the process of any court. In what cases power to quash the criminal proceeding or complaint or FIR may be exercised where the offender and the victim have settled their dispute would depend on the facts and circumstances of each case and no category can be prescribed. However, before exercise of such power, the High Court must have due regard to the nature and gravity of the crime. Heinous and serious offences of mental depravity or offences like murder, rape, dacoity, etc. cannot be fittingly quashed even though the victim or victim s family and the offender have settled the dispute. Such offences are not private in nature and have a serious impact on s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erefore, it cannot be said that there is a compromise between the offender and the victim. The offences when committed in relation with Banking activities including offences under Sections 420/471 IPC have harmful effect on the public and threaten the well being of the society. These offences fall under the category of offences involving moral turpitude committed by public servants while working in that capacity. Prima facie, one may state that the bank as the victim in such cases but, in fact, the society in general, including customers of the Bank is the sufferer. In the present case, there was neither an allegation regarding any abuse of process of any Court nor anything on record to suggest that the offenders were entitled to secure the order in the ends of justice. In the instant case, the High Court has not considered the above factors while passing the impugned order. Hence, we are of the opinion that the High Court erred in addressing the issue in right perspective. 16. In such circumstances, we set aside the impugned judgment and order dated 31st March, 2010 passed by the High Court in CRR No.719 of 2010 and direct the trial court to proceed the matter in accordance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
