High CourtsSingle Bench(1995) 02 P&H CK 0033

Joginder Singh vs State of Punjab

Punjab And Haryana At Chandigarh · Decided on 16 February 1995 · Citation: (1995) 110 PLR 492 : (1995) 2 RCR(Criminal) 304

HON’BLE JUDGES
T.H.B. Chalapathi, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous No. 17560-M of 1994

CourtKutchehry membership

More clarity. Every judgment.

Download court copies, explore connected cases and make more of every research session.

Loading membership options…

Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

3 paragraphs · 431 words

T.H.B. Chalapathi, J.—This criminal miscellaneous has been filed u/s 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the police to register a case on the complaint given by the petitioner to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar on 10.5.1994.

2.

According to the petitioner, Surinder Singh son-in-law of the petitioner applied for loan to the Bank of India, Nakodar Branch for purchasing D.C.M. Toyata and that the petitioner gave guarantee for Surinder Singh and the Bank employees got two registered deeds and also obtained his signatures on unfilled documents and that the petitioner signed the documents in good faith and affixed the signatures on many blank documents. According to him, except Surinder Singh he has not given any guarantee to any other person for obtaining the loan from Bank of India, Nakodar. It is the further case of the petitioner that the Bank of India filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 2,57,574.59 against Mahavir Singh and others, impleading the petitioner as a party showing that the petitioner stood guarantor for Mahavir Singh son of Mehtab Singh. Therefore, according to the petitioner, the Bank employees committed fraud on him by using the unfilled documents signed by him, when the loan was sanctioned to his son-in-law Surinder Singh. So he wanted the Police to take action or register a case under Sections 420, 406, 468 and 471 Indian Penal Code against the Bank employees. According to him, though he had given the application to the Senior Superintendent of Police, Jalandhar but no action has been taken and therefore, he has requested to direct the police to register the case against the employees of the Bank.

3.

I am of the opinion that the application is not maintainable. It is not for this Court to direct the police to register a case. Admittedly, the petitioner signed some documents. Whether he signed the documents knowing fully well the contents of the same or whether he signed the blank papers, is a matter to be decided in the civil suit filed by the Bank against Mahavir Singh. The decision of the Civil court will be final and the alleged complaint given by the petitioner to the Senior Superintendent of Police, is only an after thought which is after filing of the civil suit against Mahavir Singh. I do not think that this is a fit case where direction can be issued to the police for registering the case. The petition is, therefore, dismissed. However, this order will not come in the way of the petitioner seeking any such remedy as is available to him under law, civil or criminal.