9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment involves the quashing of criminal proceedings against accused individuals under Sections 406, 409, 420, and 120(b) IPC, based on petitions filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Details of the Judgment: Issue 1: Quashing of Criminal Proceedings The High Court quashed criminal proceedings against accused individuals based on the grounds that the dispute between the Bank and the accused was of a civil nature, the company involved in the alleged fraudulent operations was not accused, and the bank had remedies for recovering the money through DRT or civil proceedings. Issue 2: Bank's Arguments The appellant argued that permitting overdraft facility to customers should not equate to simple civil contracts, and criminal proceedings should be allowed if a customer commits fraud. Citing a previous case, it was emphasized that criminal proceedings can be initiated to prevent abuse of the court's process and secure justice. Issue 3: Legal Precedents Legal precedents were cited to support the argument that criminal proceedings can continue even if there is a civil dispute, and settling a monetary claim voluntarily does not warrant quashing of criminal proceedings unless specific criteria under Section 482 Cr.P.C. are met. Issue 4: Court's Decision The Supreme Court held that the High Court erred in quashing the criminal proceedings, as the allegations likely made out a criminal offense against the accused respondents. The Court emphasized that the previous failures of the accused to obtain relief under Section 482 Cr.P.C. and the order to conclude the trial within a limited time were significant factors in their decision. Conclusion The Supreme Court allowed the appeals and directed the learned Magistrate to conclude the trial expeditiously without being influenced by the observations made in the judgment.
|
