RAMENDRA PAL SINGH Vs. STATE O
LAWS(ALL)-2008-1-68
HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
Decided on January 04,2008

RAMENDRA PAL SINGH Appellant
VERSUS
STATE Respondents

JUDGEMENT

- (1.) AMAR Saran, J. Heard learned Counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate.
(2.) THIS application has been filed for quashing the charge-sheet No. 313 of 2006 dated 28. 12. 2006 in case crime No. 36 of 2004, under sections 420/467/468/471 IPC, police station Bannadevi, district Aligarh, pending in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Aligarh. The allegations in the FIR were that one Rajesh Kishore opened an account bearing No. 3825 on 9. 10. 2003 in Kshetriya Sri Gandhi Ashram extension counter of the Central Bank of India. The said Rajesh Kishore was introduced by another account holder Jeet Pal Singh. The signature of the introducer was verified by the applicant, who was in-charge of the extension branch and who completed the formalities for opening the account. Rajesh Kishore is said to have deposited three cheques of Rs. 1,60,000/-, 3,10,000/- and 3,20,000/- drawn on HDFC Bank Panchkula, Haryana for collection at the branch. The said cheques were forwarded by the Air State Courier to the Panchkula Bank of the Central Bank of India by means of FSCM. After the completion of the formalities of FSCM the said amount was deposited in the newly opened account of the account holder, who withdrew the entire amounts on different dates. On 29. 1. 2004 when a letter was sent by the Aligarh branch of the Central Bank of India to its branch at Panchkula for realization of the amount of the FSCM, then he received information by telephone on 3. 2. 2004 that the so-called FSCM, which was sent by the extension counter of the branch has not reached Panchkula nor have they realized any amount of the same. The information was then communicated by telephone to the regional office of the branch in Agra. After that, an enquiry was conducted by the Assistant Regional Manager and the Branch Manager (the informant) and they learnt that in a fraudulent manner in pursuance of a conspiracy by the Air State Courier, the said amount had been embezzled. It was further mentioned in the FIR that the introducer Jeet Pal Singh had given a letter to the branch that he had not introduced any Rajesh Kishore nor did he know him, hence it was prayed that an FIR be registered against Rajesh Kishore and the owner of Air State Courier for the said fraud.
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY, it appears that on completion of investigation the charge-sheet has only been submitted against the applicant on 28. 12. 2006, who was not named in the FIR and no charge-sheet has been submitted against Rajesh Kishore, the alleged account holder, Jeet Pal Singh, the introducer, nor the Air State Courier. In the first place, it was argued by the learned Counsel for the applicant that as the applicant was not named in the FIR, he could not be assigned any complicity in the offence.;


Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.