AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Petitioners, the Branch Head and the Zonal Credit Manager respectively, of the IndusInd Bank, employed at the Peenya Industrial Area Branch, are before the Court alleging that the petitioners have been summoned to the police station, made them to sit there at the behest of the complainant in a crime registered in Crime No.411/2026.
Heard Sri Amit Anand Deshpande, learned counsel for petitioners, Sri B.N.Jagadeesha, learned State Public Prosecutor – 1 for respondent No.1 and Sri Hemanth Raj, learned counsel for respondent No.2.
In terms of the order dated 05.08.2026, passed by this Court, the Station House Officer of the Peenya Police Station is present before this Court. His presence is noted.
Sri Amit Deshpande, learned counsel taking this Court through the averments made in the petition and the documents appended would seek to demonstrate that the petitioners were not provided with the notice and copy of the FIR as appendage to the notice issued under Section 35(3) of the BNSS and it was contrary to law.
Learned State Public Prosecutor would admit that this is an irregularity committed by the police as not appending the copy of the FIR in which the petitioners were summoned to the police station. He would further submit that the modus operandi of these officials of the bank is quite startling. The startling according to him is that, petitioner No.2 is the Zonal Credit Manager who is in charge of disbursement of loan against gold deposits. The gold deposit that he has secured from several persons are said to be spurious or fake as the case would be and on the strength of those devolved pledging, several crores of rupees is advanced as loan. When the loans became sticky and the enquiry ensued in the bank, it transpires that the Branch Head and the Zonal Credit Manager caught hold of certain gullible persons who are wanting the gold for lesser price. One such is the respondent - complainant. The complainant is said to have transferred huge sum of ₹1.54/-crores into an account of a defaulter by name Nagesh, who had taken loan against the gold that was pledged in the bank. The gold is alleged to be fake. The complainant neither gets the gold nor the money back. Therefore, registers a complaint of systematic conspiracy and cheating by several persons including the officials of the bank who are now before the Court.
Learned State Public Prosecutor – 1 would further highlight the fact that the offences that are now drawn is only for the offence under Section 318(4) of the BNS, which is the offence of cheating and the matter is still at the stage of investigation. Therefore, investigation must be permitted to be continued in the case at hand.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that they are bank officials and would not run away from the criminal justice system, be it the investigation or the trial as the case would be. He submits that the manner in which the petitioners / bank officials are treated is what is to be taken note of by this Court.
While procedural aberration might have crept in by not enclosing the copy of the FIR at the time when the petitioners were taken to the police station that would not mask or take away the tenor of the allegations that are projected by the learned State Public Prosecutor - 1. The investigation in such cases must ensue, at whose hands is the issue.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has projected that the jurisdictional police before whom he was taken and kept for hours would not conduct a fair investigation as he is influenced by the complainant or the persons who have lost their money or the gold as the case would be.
Therefore, to resolve the issue involved in the lis, more so, in the light of the fact that the pledging of the gold and the systematic working of the bank and granting of the loan is all to be made by a specialized investigation, it must be at the hands of the Criminal Investigation Department of the State of Karnataka.
Therefore, the investigation in Crime No.411/2026, shall now be taken over by the Criminal Investigation Department and begin to conduct a de novo further investigation not only with regard to the case of the complainant, but anything that would emerge during the course of the investigation to draw other persons into the dragnet of the crime.
The petitioners are at liberty to avail of such remedy as is available in law, at the relevant point in time for redressal of their grievance at that point in time.
The learned State Public Prosecutor - 1 would submit that the procedure of transition from the jurisdictional police to the hands of the Criminal Investigation Department, would take a week's time.
Therefore, the investigation shall not be interdicted and continue till the date on which the papers are handed over to the Criminal Investigation Department for the purpose of further investigation.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the matter before the concerned Court answering the bail application is pending for its consideration as the objections are already filed by the Investigating Officer.
In the light of the afore-made submissions and the contra-submissions of the parties, the concerned Court before whom the bail application is already filed shall expeditiously dispose the said bail application in terms of the guidelines laid down by the Apex Court while considering the application for bail, within 96 hours from the time of this order being uploaded in the official website of this Court.
The observations made in the course of the order is only for the purpose of limited consideration of the challenge to the crime in crime No.411/2026, for the offence punishable under Section 318(4) of the BNS, it would not bind, influence or direct the further investigation / proceedings in the application seeking bail or otherwise.
With the afore-made observations, the writ petition stands disposed.
The presence of the Station House Officer is dispensed with in the future proceedings.
Ordered accordingly.