IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.31457 of 2006 MANOHAR PRASAD & ORS Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- For the Petitioner : Mr. S.D.Sanjay, Advocate Mr. Gopal Prasad Gupta, Advocate For the BISICO : Mr. Mayank Shekhar, Advocate ----------- 15. 6.5.2009 Heard Counsel for the petitioner and Counsel for the opposite party no.2. The earlier orders of this Court dated 13.8.2007, 16.8.2007, 31.10.2007, 5.12.2007, 22.5.2008, 9.7.2008 and 19.11.2008 would speak for themselves. In a case relating to a criminal proceeding under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, this Court having noticed the basic gravemen of allegations of State undertaking, Bihar State Credit & Investment Corporation Limited (BICICO) of collecting the amount of loan advanced to them had directed the petitioners to deposit of a sum of Rs.25 lacs before they could claim benefit of One Time Settlement (O.T.S.) Scheme of BICICO. In fact when the petitioners had defaulted in making such payment in the fixed time frame, they were severely dealt with by this Court but even then, after the petitioners have made payment a sum of Rs.25 lacs, the attitude of BICICO remains the same as with regard to settlement of the remaining dues of the petitioners in respect of loan taken by them. In such a circumstance, this Court has now to 2 address itself to the merit of the case. From a bare reading of the written report, it would be found that the only allegation made therein was/is that the petitioners being the loanee of BISICO were trying to dispose of misappropriate the mortgaged assets. In the opinion of this Court, a financial institution including a State undertaking in the event of violation of the terms and conditions of agreement of loan can at best institute a civil suit for recovery of its dues or for violation of any conditions thereof. The criminal proceeding, infact, cannot become a substitute for realization of the dues of BICICO against the petitioner as non-payment of loan by a loanee and its recovery by resorting to Civil suit/money suit are only known modes in law. Be that as it may, this Court is satisfied that the present dispute as per the averments made in the petitioin of complaint is out and out a civil dispute and, therefore, the continuance of the proceeding against the petitioners would be a gross abuse of process of the court. That being so, the impugned order taking cognizance dated 7.6.2006 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Khagaria in Khagaria P.S.case No.539 of 2004 is hereby quashed and this application is accordingly allowed. Narendra/ ( Mihir Kumar Jha, J. )