9911796707
TMI Blog1997 (3) TMI 569X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .I which resulted in the filing of a charge-sheet, alleging various offences having been committed by the respondent, was sufficient for the appellant to conclude that pending prosecution the respondent should be suspended X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of the competent authority during suspension period. You are also required to submit in writing your local postal address where you want to be communicated hereafter." Pursuant to the sanction of the prosecution charge sheet dated 29.9.1987 was filed in the court against the respondent. Thereupon, the court issued summons on 26.11.1987 to the respondent filed a writ petition in the Allahabad High Court challenging the aforesaid order of suspension. By the impugned judgment dated 23.4.1991 the High Court came to the conclusion that by the mere fact that a person had entered into the criminal concpiracy, it could not be regarded that an offence involving "moral turpitude" had been committed and, therefore, the appellant had no jurisdictio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n behalf of A/C holder, the ledgers of S.B. A/C Nos. 2284 belonging to Sri Shanti Prakash and Smt. Prem Lata, show that the cheque book containing cheque Nos. 7631. 7640. 7581 to 7590 and 7551-7560 respectively were issued to these A/C holders when actually non e of these account holder shad ever applied for any cheque book nor actually cheque book was issued to any of these person and fictitious entires were made in the ledger account. The cheque no. 7631 amounting to Rs. 9560.62 paisa and cheque no. 7632 for Rs. 7532.00 was purportedly to have been issued by genuine account holder Lekha Ram of Account holder of A/C No. 2484. Another cheque No. 7551 amounting to Rs. 1400.00 cheque No. 7552 amounting to rs. 14.800.00 purportedly have been i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he cheque facility in operating their respective accounts. Total sum of Rs. 56.103.77 was withdrawn from said fake account No. 3206 by Sri Deepak Kumar Bhola by issueing five cheques by signing as Rajendra Rathore." On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the respondent was charged for offences punishable under Sections 120(B)/429/420/467/468/471 I.P.C. and 5 (2) read with Section 5(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act. 1947. It will be appropriate for refer clauses 19.2 & 19.3 of the First Bipartite Settlement under which orders were passed suspending the respondent. These clauses read as follows: "19.2 By the expression " offence" shall be meant any offence involving moral turpitude for which an employee is liable to conviction and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... age 21 dealt with the question as to what is the meaning of expression "moral turpitude" and it was observed as follows" ""Moral turpitude" is an expression which is used in legal as also societal parlance to describe conduct which is inherently base, vile, depraved or having any connection showing depravity". This expression has been more elaborately explained in BALESHWAR SINGH vs. DISTRICT MAGISTRATE AND COLLECTOR. BANARAS, AIR 1959 All. 71 where it was observed as follows: "The expression "moral turpitude' is not defined anywhere. But it means anything done contrary to justice, honesty, modesty or good morals. It implies depravity and wickness of character or disposition of the person charged with the particular conduct. Every false ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ay the least, surprised at the conclusion which has been arrived by the Allahabad High Court. There was material an received before the appellant, in the form of the report of the C.B.I./S.P.E., which clearly indicated the acts of commission and commissions, amounting to "moral turpitude' alleged to have been committed by the respondent. further more the respondent has been charged with various offences allegedly committed while he was working in the bank and punishment for which could extend upto ten years imprisonment (in case the respondent is convicted under Section I.P.C.). We are unable to agree with the contention of learned counsel for the respondent that there has been no application of mind or the objective consideration of the f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
