Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008 1 and Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Date of decision:- 12.08.2011 1. Crl. Revision No. 1848 of 2007 (O&M) The State of Punjab ....Petitioner Vs. Mandeep Singh ....Respondent 2. Crl. Revision No. 240 of 2008 (O&M) The State of Punjab ....Petitioner Vs. Vinod Kumar ....Respondent 3. Crl. Revision No. 241 of 2008 (O&M) The State of Punjab ....Petitioner Vs. Mandeep Singh ....Respondent 4. Crl. Revision No. 1914 of 2008 (O&M) Kamal Kishore ....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008 2 and Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 5. Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 (O&M) Vinod Ghai ....Petitioner Vs. Kamal Kishore ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.N. JINDAL Present:- Mr. Baljinder Singh Sra, Addl. A.G. Punjab, for the State. Mr. H.S. Bath, Advocate, for the petitioner (in CRR No. 1914 of 2008) Mr. Kawaljit Singh, Senior Advocate, with Mr. I.P.Singh, Advocate, for the respondent(s) (in CRR Nos.1848 of 2007 and 241 of 2008). Mr. Atul Goyal, Advocate, for Mr. Vikram Chaudhary, Advocate and Mr. Sumeet Puri, Advocate, for respondent/petitioner-Vinod Kumar Ghai (in CRR No. 1914 of 2008 and Crl. Misc. No.M-14003 of 2010). ***** A.N. JINDAL, J (ORAL) This judgment shall dispose of Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008 and Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010, as all have arisen out of the same judgment. For reference, facts are taken from Criminal Revision No. 1848 of 2007. The above said revisions are directed against the judgment dated 13.06.2007 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Amritsar, accepting the revisions filed by Mandeep Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008 3 and Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 Singh and Vinod Kumar against the order dated 03.09.2005 passed by Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Amristar acquitting them of the charge framed against them. Learned counsel for the respondent(s) does not deny the fact that Kamal Kishore-complainant had deposited 13 FDRs. As per order dated 17.01.2002, issued by the Banking Ombudsman, 8 FDRs have already been released. Out of the remaining 5 FDRs, 3 are in the name of the minors, which they have not adjusted against the loan. As regards the remaining 2 FDRs, the Civil Suit is still pending. Two FDRs in the name of Kamal Kishore have been adjusted against the loan taken by Banarsi Dass. The case of the petitioner(s) is that Kamal Kishore-complainant never stood surety in case of loan of Banarsi Dass. It is also not disputed that the matter with regard to suit for recovery is pending in the Civil Court and the Civil Court is to decide, whether Kamal Kishore stood surety for the loan or not. The respondent would abide by the judgment passed by the Civil Court. Eventually, if it is held that Kamal Kishore never stood surety, then the respondents would have to release the FDRs. After hearing learned counsel for both the parties, it appears that prima facie no offence under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468 and 120-B IPC is made out against the accused. However, the trial against Banarsi Dass is already pending adjudication. Without commenting on the merits of the case, so that trial of Banarsi Dass may not be affected, it is observed that impugned order does not suffer from any such infirmity warranting interference by this Court. Thus, finding no merits in Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008, same are hereby Crl. Revision Nos. 1848 of 2007, 240, 241, 1914 of 2008 4 and Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 dismissed. Learned counsel for the petitioner (in Crl. Misc. No.M- 14003 of 2010) wishes to withdraw the present petition with liberty to contest the complaint on the basis of the order of discharge passed by the Court of Addl. Sessions Judge (Adhoc), Amritsar. In view of the said fact, Crl. Misc. No. M-14003 of 2010 stands dismissed as withdrawn with liberty aforesaid. (A.N.JINDAL) 12th of August, 2011 JUDGE ajp