JUDGEMENT
Ram Krishna Gautam, J. -
(1.)This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed with a prayer for quashing the order dated 04.09.2019, passed by Chief Judicial Magistrate, Ghaziabad including entire proceeding of Complaint Case No. 32560 of 2018, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C. Police Station Indrapuram, District Ghaziabad.
(2.)Learned counsel for applicant argued that applicant was Branch Manager in Punjab and Sind Bank, Branch Kaushambi, District Ghaziabad. An amount was transferred from account of Rohit Sharma, Rahul Sharma and Smt. Urmila in account of Kamleshwaranand, being maintained in above Bank. Subsequently, a request from those persons, through whom this amount was transacted, was received that it was an erroneous transfer and that amount be returned back. This Branch Manager complied above request and returned above amount, for which there was no guilty mind. Subsequently, this came into her notice that there had been some criminal litigation regarding alleged fraud committed by Rohit Sharma, Rahul Sharma and Smt. Urmila with Kamleshwaranand. The amount was further remitted to this branch of Punjab and Sind Bank, of which applicant is Manager. Still that amount is lying in a freezed account and there is no malice nor any mens rea on the part of Branch Manager in a transaction in between Kamleshwaranand, Rohit Sharma, Rahul Sharma and Smt. Urmila, but vide impugned summoning order, this applicant too has been summoned for offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B I.P.C., which is apparently erroneous and misuse of process of Court. Hence, this application with above prayer.
(3.)Learned counsel for complainant Kamleshwaranand argued that account of Kamleshwaranand was with above branch of Bank concerned, in which applicant was Branch Manager. Kamleshwaranand entered into agreement to sell of his own flat and in lieu of consideration that money was transacted in account of Kamleshwaranand through RTGS and once it was there the same may not be returned back to those accused persons against whom summoning is there, but it was conspiracy of Branch Manager, who returned above money and it was against the guidelines of Reserve Bank of India enumerated in Paras 3, 4 and 5 of Central Government Act Section 23 in the Payment of Settlement System Act, 2007 wherein Reserve Bank of India has given direction. Hence, trial court has rightly passed impugned summoning order and this application is to be rejected.
Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.