- (1.) Smt. Indu Devi Tapuriah ( hereinafter referred to as O.P. No. 2) lodged one complaint in the Court of learned Additional Metropolitan Magistrate, Calcutta against the Punjab National Bank, Dr. K. C. Chakraborty (Chairman & Managing Director, Punjab National Bank), J. M. Garg ( Executive Director Punjab National Bank), Branch Manager, Fort Branch Mumbai ( Anil Kumar Patil), General Manager, Punjab National Bank (Surendra Singh Bhandari), Chief Manager, Punjab National Bank ( Harjeet Sing Rekhi), Ramesh Kumar Kocher, Company Secretary, Punjab National Bank, S. K. Agarwal, Dy. General Manager, Punjab National Bank, S.K. Agarwal, Deputy General Manager, Punjab National Bank, Alok Kumar (Recovery Manager, Punjab National Bank), and other petitioners. The complaint was registered as C- 898/2008. Excepting the accused No. 1, Punjab National Bank, all the persons made accused in the case have come up with separate applications under Section 482 of the code of Criminal Procedure praying for quashing of the proceeding against them on various grounds. The accused No. 2 to 10, the officials of the Punjab National Bank together has taken out one application being No. 1828 of 2009. All other applications mentioned in the captioned above, have been taken out by other petitioners separately. Since the questions raised by all the petitioners are same and arising out of one complaint lodged by Smt. Indu Devi Taporiah against them, all the petitions are disposed of by this common order.
(2.) In her petition of complaint dated 29.8.2008, the opposite party no. 2 alleged that she was lawful owner of several shares of reputed companies including 6000 equity shares of Grashim Industries Ltd., 950 equity shares of Hindalco Company Limited and 2600 equity shares of Larson & Toubro Ltd. She was maintaining depository account in respect of those shares with Global Trust Bank Ltd. She created pledge of said equity shares and securities in favour of Nedungadi Bank Ltd ( taken over by accused no. 1 Punjab National Bank on and from 01.02.2003) for a period of one year so as to open an import letter of credit for a sum of Rs. 70 lakhs in the name of Amgulf Polymers and Chemicals Ltd. The opposite party no. 2 and the then Nedungaldi Bank Ltd. and its responsible officers agreed to the terms and conditions of said pledge on 17.01.2002. The pledge was created on 18.01.2002 for one year only, i.e., till 18.01.2003 by the opposite party no. 2 in respect of her shares and securities. The Banking company issued two letters on 31.01.2002 and 02.02.2002 in favour of Amgulf Polymen and Chemicals Ltd. confirming sanction of import letter of credit and the entire acts were done by the accused no. 11 i.e., Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. and its officers. However, the accused no. 1, the Bank finally refused issue such letter of credit to that company. Because of non-issuance of letter of credit by the accused Bank, the pledge agreement became nonest and infractuous automatically and was supposed to be closed. In stead of closing the pledge on her shares and securities, the accused no. 1 and 11 retained the said shares and securities of the opposite party no. 2. She requested Global Trust Bank Ltd, Stock Holding Corporation of India Lmited and accused bank to close/release said shares and securities. In stead of closing the pledge or releasing the shares and securities, the accused Bank in connivance with accused Stock Holding corporation of India Ltd. surreptitiously transferred the shares of the opposite party no. 2 in their D. P. Account being client I.D. No. 36450 keeping the opposite party no. 2 in dark. The opposite party no. 2 sent a legal notice on the accused Bank on 27.12.2003 mentioning therein the illegality on its part and asked retransfer of her shares and securities in her favour and to release the same by Stock Holding Corporation of India Ltd. The accused Bank and its officers did not act as asked by the opposite party no. 2 but, on the contrary, informed her in writing that her request was turned down on the ground that the securities pledged were adjusted by the Bank towards liquidation of the debt/liability of the said company and on 14.1.2004, informed her by another letter that after having adjusted the said shares owned by the opposite party no. 2 in favour of the said company, excess amount was paid over by the accused bank to the said company.
(3.) It has been alleged by the opposite party no. 2 that the accused persons had dishonest intention from the very inception to induce her to part with her and entrust with them her shares and securities worth Rs. 200,00,000/- for causing wrongful gain to them and wrongful loss to her. The pledge was created by the opposite party no. 2 in favour of accused Bank for one year only through her depositor participant Bank which was confirmed by the accused no. 11, Stock Holding corporation of India Ltd.;