Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: MAY 13, 2010 Major Singh .....APPLICANT Versus State of Punjab and others ....RESPONDENTS CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE JORA SINGH --- Present: Mr.H.S. Rakhra, Advocate, for the applicant. .. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. The present case is a glaring example of misuse of judicial process by a litigant to harass the innocent persons for oblique motive. The applicant along with his brother had taken a loan from State Bank of India (hereinafter referred to as `the bank') for purchase of a tractor by mortgaging their land in favour of the bank. They deposited few installments with the bank from time to time, but ultimately they became defaulters. Thereupon, the bank filed a Civil Suit for recovery of the outstanding loan amount against them. The said suit was contested by the applicant and his brother by disputing the outstanding amount and on other grounds. Ultimately, vide judgment and decree dated 12.10.2002, the suit filed by the bank was decreed. It appears that against the said judgment and decree, no appeal was filed. However, during pendency of the said suit, the applicant filed an Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 -2- application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. for initiating action against K.K. Mehta, Branch Manager of the bank for filing the suit on fabricated documents. The said application was dismissed by the Court vide order dated 1.6.2002. Undisputedly, no revision/appeal was filed against the said order and the same became final. After dismissal of the above-said application and passing of the judgment and decree against the applicant, he filed a criminal complaint against the Chief Manager, K.K. Mehta, who was the Branch Manager, R.P. Jain, Field Officer and V.K. Galhotra, Chief Manager of the bank under Sections 196/199/420/409/120-B IPC alleging therein that he had paid an amount of Rs.4,000/- on 23.2.1998 and Rs.3,000/- in June, 1998 to K.K. Mehta for crediting the same in his account, but instead of depositing the said amount in his account, he had misappropriated the same in collusion with other accused, and thereafter, by adducing the false evidence, they procured a Civil Court decree against him. In the said complaint, only K.K. Mehta was summoned under Section 409 IPC. In support of his case, the complainant examined himself and one Harchand Singh as CW1, and placed on record certain documents. The respondent accused also examined DW1-Jagdish Rai, Deputy Manager of the bank and also placed on record certain documents. The trial Court after considering the evidence led by the parties acquitted the respondent while observing that the complaint filed by the applicant is nothing but a motivated and baseless complaint filed by him on the basis of false and frivolous facts. It has been noticed that in the Civil Suit filed by the bank, the applicant did not take any plea in his written statement that he had deposited the amount of Rs.4,000/- on 23.2.1998 and Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 -3- Rs.3,000/- in June, 1998. It has been further noticed that as per the voucher Ex.D3 placed on record by the bank, the complainant deposited Rs.20,000/- on 23.2.1998, and thereafter, he himself had given an undertaking to deposit a sum of Rs.5,000/- up to 22.3.1998. The said letter bears the signature of complainant Major Singh, but in the complaint and in his evidence, he has not disclosed all these facts. It was further noticed that during the pendency of the complaint, the complainant had accepted the decree and deposited the decretal amount without raising any protest, but on the other hand, he was pursuing the complaint on the false allegations that K.K. Mehta had misappropriated Rs.7,000/-, which were given to him for depositing in his account. Vide judgment dated 28.11.2009, the trial Court acquitted the accused respondent by giving him the benefit of doubt. Against the aforesaid judgment, the applicant has filed the appeal along with an application under Section 378(4) Cr.P.C. for grant of Special Leave to appeal. We have heard the learned counsel for the applicant and gone through the impugned judgment. In our opinion, the applicant had filed the complaint against the respondents totally on false and frivolous facts with an oblique motive to harass the bank authorities. The only allegation in the complaint, on which K.K. Mehta was charged under Section 409 IPC, was that on 23.2.1998 and in June, 1998, the applicant had paid him Rs.4,000/- and Rs.3,000/-, respectively, for crediting the same in his account, which, according to the complainant, were not deposited by him in his account and were misappropriated by him. But this fact apparently appears to be false because in the Civil Suit filed by the bank, which was pertaining to the same account, the applicant had never taken such plea that he had deposited the Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 -4- aforesaid amount on the above-mentioned dates. Therefore, in our opinion, the trial Court has rightly come to the conclusion that the said plea taken on the basis of the complaint, is false and frivolous. Further, the application under Section 340 Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant in the Civil Suit filed by the respondent bank, for initiating the action against K.K. Mehta for filing the suit on fabricated documents, was dismissed by the Court vide order dated 1.6.2002. Against the said order, no appeal/revision was filed by the applicant. Further, even the decree was accepted as the decretal amount was deposited during execution. All these facts clearly indicate that there was no substance in the allegations made by the applicant in the complaint. Therefore, the trial Court after taking into consideration all these facts, has rightly acquitted the accused respondent. In spite of the fact that the applicant has no prima-facie case at all, he has filed the appeal against the said judgment. In the memo of parties, the applicant has arrayed five persons as accused whereas the trial Court framed charge only against K.K. Mehta. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the applicant could not point out any ground on which he is challenging the impugned judgment, except saying that the finding recorded by the trial Court with regard to payment of Rs.4,000/- on 23.2.1998 and Rs.3,000/- in June, 1998 to Shri K.K. Mehta, is wrong. After considering the submissions, we do not find any illegality in the judgment of the trial Court and, thus, there is no ground to grant Special Leave to appeal against the said judgment. However, after going through the impugned judgment, we find that the criminal complaint filed by the applicant against the bank authorities is not only based on frivolous and baseless facts, but the same was filed with an Crl.Misc.No.A.279-MA of 2010 -5- oblique motive to harass the respondents. The applicant throughout was aware that his complaint is based on false facts. In spite of that, he was pursuing the said false complaint and has consumed the valuable time of the Court. Even after a categoric finding was recorded against him, he has filed the instant appeal without there being any ground except by saying that the judgment of the trial Court is wrong and against the facts. Counsel could not point out anything which shows that the facts stated in the impugned judgment are against the record. In our opinion, when in the Civil Suit filed by the bank against the applicant and his brother, which was decreed in the year 2002, the applicant could not succeed, he filed the baseless and motivated criminal complaint in the year 2003 on the basis of false and frivolous facts, just to harass the bank authorities, which was decided by the Court in the year 2009. In our view, due to the said callous and malicious attitude adopted by the applicant, valuable time of the Court has been consumed. Therefore, this application deserves to be dismissed with exemplary costs. Hence, the application is dismissed with costs, which are assessed at Rs.25,000/-. Copies of the order be sent to the parties. (SATISH KUMAR MITTAL) JUDGE May 13, 2010 ( JORA SINGH ) vkg JUDGE