Criminal Appeal Nos 380 of 1989 and 323 of 1988
From the Judgment and Order dated 2811988 of the Allahabad High Court in Crl
Appln
No 995 of 1987
G Ramaswamy Additional Solicitor General Anil Dev Singh Miss A Subhashini and RP Kapur for the Appellants
RL Kohli Manoj Saxena and RD Upadhyay for the Respondents
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by DUTT J
These two appeals by special leave one pre ferred by the State of U P and the other by the State Bank of India are directed against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court whereby the High Court has quashed the criminal proceedings being Crime Case No 40 of 1983 in the Court of Special Judge Anti Corruption only as against the respond ent RK Srivastava
In quashing the proceedings in the exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr
PC the High Court took the view that allegations made in the First Information Report 836 FIR did not constitute any offence
In order to appreciate the view of the High Court it is necessary to refer to the FIR which reads as follows An information has been received that Shri PC Saxena and Shri Ram Kumar Srivastava while posted and functioning as Accountant and Clerk cum Godown Keeper in the State Bank of India Agriculture Development Branch Budaun respectively entered into a criminal conspira cy with Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt
Rajwant Kaur Props
of Ms National Mill Store Budaun during the month of June 1982 to cheat the State Bank of India Budaun and in pursuance of the said criminal conspiracy anamount of Rs54600  was withdrawn on the basis of false credit entry made in the books of accounts of the Bank and connected credit and debit vouchers were also prepared and passed by the accused employees of the Bank and payment were made to the accused persons namely Shri Sarwant Singh and Smt
Rajwant Kaur who tendered cheque No 348459 dated 25
1982 for Rs18600 cheque No 348482 for Rs 19200 date 26
1982 and cheque No 502206 dated 2682 for Rs 16800  54600
The above facts constitute offence punishable us 120 B 420 468471 IPC and 52 rw 51d of PC Act 1947
A regular case is therefore regis tered and its investigation is entrusted to Shri VP Arya Inspector of this establish ment According to the FIR as against three cheques of the aggre gate amount of Rs54600 presumably of three different Banks a credit entry was made in the accounts of Ms National Mill Stores Co Budaun and Ms New Manufacturing Co Budaun and their partners Sardar Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt
Rajwant Kaur in the State Bank of India and the said sum of Rs54600 was allowed to be withdrawn by them by the respondent and the accused PC Saxena
The allegations in the FIR appear to be vague and al though it is alleged that the respondent and the accused PC Saxena made false credit entries in the books of ac counts of the Bank and connected credit and debit vouchers were also prepared and passed by them no 837 particulars of the same have been given
It appears from the chargesheet that the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt
Rajwant Kaur and their firms namely Ms National Mill Stores Co Budaun and Ms New ManufaCturing Co Budaun have current accounts in the State Bank of India Budaun
After the said three cheques amounting to Rs54600 were tendered the respondent and the accused PC Saxena sent the said cheques for clearance and allowed the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife Smt
Rajwant Kaur to with draw the sum of Rs 54600 from their current account
It is now a well settled principle of law that if the allegations made in the FIR are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not constitute an offence the criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such FIR should be quashed
In the instant case on the basis of the said FIR the respondent and the said PC Saxena and Shri Sarwant Singh were charged under sections 120 B 420 468 and 471 IPC and section 52 read with section 51d of the Prevention of Corruption Act 1947
According to the appellant as no prima facie case was made out against Smt
Rajwant Kaur wife of Shri Sarwant Singh she has been dropped from the array of the accused persons
The question is whether the facts disclosed in the FIR constitute the offences with which the accused have been charged
It is manifestly clear from the allegations in the FIR that the respondent or the other accused had no inten tion whatsoever to make any wrongful gain or to make any wrongful loss to the Bank
They had accepted the said three cheques amounting to Rs54600 and sent the same for clear ance after debiting the LOC account
The said cheques have been encashed and the money was received by the State Bank of India
It may be that there was some delay in crediting the LOC account or that the money against the three cheques were credited in the accounts of the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife but the allegations made either in the FIR or in the charge sheet do not show that the respondent and the said PC Saxena had acted dishonestly that is to say acted with a deliberate intention to cause wrongful gain or wrongful loss
In our opinion the High Court has rightly held that the allegations made in the FIR do not constitute any offence of cheating nor do they constitute any offence of forgery
It is true that it has been alleged that the said sum of Rs54600 was withdrawn on the basis of false credit entries made in the books of accounts of the Bank and connected credit and debit vouchers were also prepared and passed by the respondent and the other accused
When the said sum of Rs54600 838 had been allowed to be withdrawn by the said Shri Sarwant Singh and his wife necessary entries had to be made in the books of accounts but it is not understandable how these entries can be characterised as false entries
No document has been referred to in the FIR as the outcome of forgery
The High Court has rightly held that as the criminal proceedings have been started against the respondent on the basis of a FIR which does not contain any definite accusa tion it amounts to an abuse of process of the court and as such is liable to be quashed
We entirely agree with the view expressed by the High Court
The High Court has quashed the proceedings only as against the respondent No 1 RK Srivastava
In our opin ion when the allegations in the FIR are the same against all the accused persons the entire proceedings as against all the accused persons including the said PC Saxena and the said Shri Satwant Singh should be quashed
Accordingly while we uphold the judgment of the High Court we quash the entire criminal proceedings being Crime Case No 40 of 1983 also as against the accused PC Saxena and Shri Sarwant Singh
The appeals are disposed of as above
NPV Appeals disposed of


Summary:
A Constable while returning home after performing his duties was knocked down by a tractor owned by appellant No 1 and driven by appellant No 2 who had no driving licence
As a result of the accident the Constable died and his widow and children claimed compensation before the Tribu nal
Awarding a compensation of Rs96000 the Tribunal held that at the time of the accident the vehicle belonged to appellant No 1 and was driven by appellant No 2 who had no driving licence that the accident took place due to his rash and negligent driving and appellant No 1 alone was liable to pay the compensation
The appellant has come in appeal by special leave contending that the insurer alone would be liable to pay the compensation amount even though the tractor was not driven by a licensed driver
Dismissing the appeal HELD 1
Section 96 of the imposes a duty on the insurer to satisfy judgments against persons insured in respect of third party risks
Sub section 2 thereof provides exception to the liability of the insur er
Sub sec
2b of sec
96 provides that the insurer is not liable to satisfy the judgments against the persons insured if there has been a breach of a specified condition of the policy
One of the conditions of the policy specified under clause ii is that the vehicle should not be driven by any person who is not duly licensed or by any person who has been disqualified from holding or obtaining driving licence during the period of disqualification
It is not in dispute that the certificate of insurance concerned in this case contains this condition
If therefore there is a breach of this condition the insurer will not be liable to indemnify the owner
813C E 812 2
In the present case the onus of the insurer has been discharged from the evidence of the insured himself
The insured took a positive defence stating that he was not the owner of the vehicle since he had already sold the same to a third party
This had not been proved
Secondly he took a defence stating that the vehicle at the relevant time was driven  by a licensed driver
This was proved to be false
There is no other material even to indicate that the vehicle was entrusted to the licensed driver on the date of the fatal accident
814D F Skandia Insurance Co Ltd vs Kokilaben Chandravadan and Ors 1987 2 SCC 654 distinguished