1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 5644 OF 2009 WITH CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO. 562 OF 2009 Bank of India & Anr. ... Applicants. V/s. Mr. & Mr. V.B. Khapre & Ors. ... Respondents. Mr. Chandra i/b. Law Focus for the Applicants. Mrs. Lata Desai i/b. Ms. Pallavi Divekar for the Respondents. CORAM : S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J. DATED : 18th JANUARY 2010. P.C. :- Bank of India which is the Applicant before me in this Application prays for quashing of proceedings which are instituted against it by the Inspector, Security Guards Board of Greater Bombay. 2. The allegations in the complaint is that the Bank Employed Private Security Guards contrary to the prohibition contained in the Private Security Guards Act and the Schemes thereunder. Therefore, it has committed an offence punishable under the said provisions. 3. When this matter was argued in the morning session, my attention was invited by the Applicant’s Counsel to a letter addressed by the Bank in pursuance of the show cause notice wherein the Bank asserted that it had not posted security guards, in fact, the property was mortgaged to it. In default 2 by the Borrower, proceedings were initiated by the Debt Recovery Tribunal and which issued a Recovery Certificate. In execution of the Recovery Certificate, the property has been sold. The sale has taken place prior to the filing of the complaint. The Bank’s Counsel took time to seek instructions with regard to the date of the same. 4. The complaint is presented on 31st October 2007. The sale in this case took place on 27th July 2007 and it was confirmed on 28th August 2007. The physical possession has already been handed over to the purchaser prior to the filing of the complaint. 5. In these circumstances, the Security Guards Board complaint in the present case is quashed and set aside. The Applications are allowed in these terms. However, this order shall not be treated as a precedent for other cases. (S.C. DHARMADHIKARI,J.)