Bipan Kumar vs C.L. Mahajan, Manager, Punjab National Bank and Another

J.S. Sekhon, J.—The only controversy involved in this Criminal revision petition is whether the non-return of documents by the accused respondent would amount to the commission of offences punishable under Sections 408, 418, 420,424 read with Section 120B of the Indian Penal Code

The brief resume of facts relevant for the disposal of this revison petition is that the complainant-petitioner in the capacity of a partner of M/s Laxmi Enamel Works, Khanna, applied for getting some loan from the Punjab Financial Corporation, Chandigarh The Corporation asked the complainant to get a cash credit limit of Rs. 5,06,000/- fixed from the Bank and get a confidential report regarding his financial status. The complainant accordingly applied for fixing the cash credit limit to the Khanna branch of the Punjab National Bank. Shri C. I. Mahajan was then working as Manager of that branch and asked for certaia documents from the complainant The complainant accordingly supplied these documents on 7-11-1985. Thereafter, the Manager of the Bank sent a confidential report dated 18-11-1986 to the Corporation on the basis of documents furnished by the complaianant but the Bank sent adverse report, upon which the Corporation refused to grant the loan. The complainant also filed some complaint before the higher authorities against the Manager of the Bank imputing dishonest intention in destroying the valuable documents and in not allowing cash credit limit upto the extent of the afore-referred amount.

The trial Court after appraising the evidence of PW-1 Kuljit Pal Singh, a Legal Assistant in the office of the Corporation, beside that of Ram Parkash (PW-2) father of the complainant, and of the complainant himself refused to summon the accused for the above referred offences by holding that the complainant bad not furnished original documents to the accused-respondent -and that copies of the documents cannot be said to be valuable security or property and thus the accused had not committed any offence even ex facie.

I have heard the learned counsel for the parties beside perusing the order of the trial Court.

By no stretch of imagination, the copies of certain acoments can be said to be a valuable security. Thus the entrustment of such like documents or even non-return thereof would be of no consequence in concluding that the accused had committed any offence of breach of trust or cheating or that the retention of those documents had resulted in any loss to the complainant. On the other band these documents were submitted for a limited purpose to the Manager of the Bank who had made an adverse report regarding the financial status of the complainant, which had resulted in not sanctioning any loan by the Corporation. Thus obviously. the complaint appears to have been filed due to this grouse of the complainant.

Consequently there being no merit in this revision petition, it is order to be dismissed.