AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
Shiv Narayan Dhingra, J.—By present petition, the Petitioner has assailed summoning Order dated 06.03.2009 passed by the Ld. ACMM whereby the Petitioner was summoned to face trial for offence u/s 406 IPC.
Brief facts relevant for the purpose of deciding this petition are that the complainant was having a Saving Bank Account with Petitioner bank (Shadhara Branch) No. 12248. Another company M/s. Vasudha Courier was having Current Account bearing same number i.e. 12248 with the same branch. M/s Vasudha Courier deposited cash of Rs. 1500/- in its current account on 30.11.2002. By a clerical mistake, this amount was shown deposited by the bank in saving bank account No. 12248. Again on 18.12.2002 a sum of Rs. 1500/- was deposited by M/s Vasudha Courier in their current account but that was also credited in the saving bank account of Respondent. M/s Vasudha Courier who was having current account of the same number wrote a letter to the bank accompanied by two counterfoils of the pay-in slips and enquired as to why entries had not been made about these deposits in the current account.
The bank then verified and realized that due to inadvertence, the amounts deposited by M/s Vasudha Courier were credited in saving bank account of the complainant. On realizing this, the entries were reversed from the complainant account and the amount was credited to the amount of M/s Vasudha Courier. The balance amount in complainant account after reversing these entries came to be Rs. 4423/-.
After about two years the complainant got her pass book completed and discovered about this reversal of entries. Due to a computer mistake her balance was shown double the actual amount i.e. instead of Rs. 4423/-, it was shown as Rs. 8846/-. A legal notice was sent by complainant to the bank as to why the debit entries were made. The bank replied to the legal notice of the complainant and explained its mistake of crediting the money of current account of same number in her account. However, the complainant filed a complaint against the bank u/s 406, 409 of IPC and u/s 31/74/77/92 of Negotiable Instruments Act.
Perusal of complaint of the complainant makes it clear that the entire dispute between the complainant and the bank was in respect of the reversal of entries and charges deducted by the bank in respect of non operation of the account. These charges were also deducted as per rules.
I am surprised that the Ld. MM without going through the documents and the complaint passed summoning order. In fact, the entire complaint and the documents do not disclose commission of an offence u/s 406 IPC. The court should have refused to take cognizance of the complainant itself in view of Section 81 of the IPC as well as Section 95 of IPC.
I therefore allow this petition.
The Order dated 6th March, 2009 passed by the learned ACMM is hereby set aside.