9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (3) TMI 378X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by him from the Opp. Party No.2/ Bank and due to his arrest after 7-8 days of the deposit of the said cheque, he could not contact the Opp. Party No.2/ Bank to know about the status of the aforesaid cheque. The fact that the Petitioner or any of his acquaintances did not inquire about the status of the cheque for approximately 2 years (5years in total) from the date of deposit itself casts a doubt on the genuineness of the Petitioner s claim - the Petitioner in the instant case did not inquire about the status of deposit even after a week and thereafter, he was arrested. Moreover, a case for obtaining money through fraud has been registered against the Petitioner vide Badambadi P.S Case No.136/2017 under Sections 420, 467, 471 and 406 of IPC. The cheque in question in the present Writ Petition is also the subject matter of the said criminal case and the same is pending for trial. Since, a criminal case is pending against the Petitioner where he has been accused of receiving huge sums of money amounting to Rs.1,44,77,000/- for committing fraud, it is imperative that the case be investigated in proper prospective so as to unearth the true dimensions of the crime. Under these ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot respond to the same. 5. The Petitioner approached the Opposite Party No.2 in his representation dated 20.09.2021 asking for his account status details to which the Opposite Party No.2 in its letter dated 27.09.2021 intimated the Petitioner, in very brief, that his account has been freezed in connection with the police case stated therein, but no clarification and information was given regarding the cheque which was deposited by the Petitioner more than six months before and also regarding initiation of criminal case against him. 6. The Petitioner finding no efficacious remedy approached the Banking Ombudsman-Opposite Party No.1 for ventilating his grievance on 17.02.2022. According to the Petitioner, his case was not adjudicated by the Ombudsman in proper prospective and the same was dismissed in a mechanical manner and the proceeding was closed on the ground that: since a case has been registered against you by the law enforcement authority and basing on the same the bank has acted upon. Therefore your complaint is treated as dealt with and closed under appropriate clause of the Integrated Ombudsman Scheme 2021. Accordingly, the complaint has been closed under Clause ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ch. From the counter foil dated 12.06.2017 filed by the Petitioner, it is clearly evident that the Petitioner had managed to obtain the bank seal on the said counter foil as there is no endorsement given by the bank officials in proof of receipt of the same. 11. Further, from the allegations made in the F.I.R lodged against the Petitioner, it is evident that the Petitioner being one of the Executive Committee Member of the Queen Mary's School, had cheated the Informant in different ways and had received huge amount of Rs.1,44,77,000/- from him by committing fraud. While cheating the Informant, the Petitioner forged many documents including the lease deed and civil court order and supplied the same to the Informant for the purpose of gaining undue advantage. The Petitioner never presented the cheque in question before the Bank of the Opp. Parties No.2 and 3 on 12.06.2017 because the said SB Account of the Informant was closed since 09.02.2015. 12. Moreover, after considering the counter affidavit filed by the Opp. Party Nos. 2 and 3, this Court, pursuant to order dated 29.07.2020 has directed the Opp. Party No. 4 namely the South Indian Bank Limited to issue instruction fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fter, he was arrested. 15. Further, the acknowledgement slip/counterfoil for deposit of cheque is usually accessible to all persons/customers who visit bank as the counterfoil is the part of pay-in-slip and it is usually stamped if the depositor insists for an acknowledgement slip in lieu of his deposit. Therefore, the counterfoil and the corresponding bank seal can be easily obtained through forgery even though no actual deposit has been made to the bank and in the instant case where the counterfoil has not been endorsed by any bank official; there is a possibility that the said bank seal could have been forged. It is also contended that after receiving notice from this Court in the present case, the Opp. Party No.2 obtained a report from the South Indian Bank, Cuttack, about the status of SB Account No.0569053000001006 and it was reported that the account of Mathew Kuzhikandan was closed since 09.02.2015 and the South Indian bank, Cuttack branch had never received any intimation from the Federal Bank Pvt. Ltd., Cuttack branch in connection with the encashment of the cheque No.270767 dated 06.06.2017 16. Moreover, a case for obtaining money through fraud has been registered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
