Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed an appeal filed by S.K. Miglani, a former Branch Manager of Bank of Baroda, Faridabad, challenging the Delhi High Court's order dated 06.08.2018 which upheld the Chief Metropolitan Magistrate's (CMM) rejection of his discharge application under Section 482 CrPC. The appellant sought quashing of FIR No. 432/2000 and the charge sheet under Sections 201, 409, 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B IPC, and the framing of charges against him under Sections 465/120B IPC. The case arose from a complaint by DDA regarding fraudulent reduction of flat cost and encashment of a refund cheque of Rs. 2,22,263/- through a fictitious savings account (No. 33604) opened in the name of the allottee, Gautam Dhar, at the appellant's bank branch. The appellant argued that as a public servant, prosecution sanction under Section 197 CrPC was mandatory, and that the handwriting expert's report was inconclusive. The respondent State contended that forgery cannot be considered an act in discharge of official duty. The Supreme Court, relying on Parkash Singh Badal v. State of Punjab (2007) 1 SCC 1, held that offences of forgery, cheating, and criminal conspiracy cannot by their very nature be regarded as committed in discharge of official duty, and thus no sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required. The court found no merit in the appeal and dismissed it, upholding the orders of the CMM and the High Court.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Sanction for Prosecution - Section 197 CrPC - Public Servant - Act of forgery by a public servant cannot be considered an act done in discharge of official duty - The appellant, a bank manager, opened a fictitious savings account in the name of the allottee with forged signatures to encash a refund cheque - Held that the offence of forgery under Section 465 IPC or offences under Sections 467, 468, 471 and 120B IPC cannot by their very nature be regarded as having been committed while acting or purporting to act in discharge of official duty (Paras 7-8). B) Indian Penal Code - Forgery - Section 465 IPC - Criminal Conspiracy - Section 120B IPC - Bank Manager - Opening fictitious account - The appellant was charged under Sections 465/120B IPC for forging account opening form and conspiring with co-accused to commit criminal breach of trust - The court upheld the framing of charges and rejection of discharge application (Paras 2.3-2.4, 7).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a public servant (bank manager) is entitled to discharge for want of sanction under Section 197 CrPC when accused of forgery and criminal conspiracy in opening a fictitious bank account
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the orders of the CMM and the High Court. The court held that no sanction under Section 197 CrPC is required for prosecution of a public servant for offences of forgery, cheating, and criminal conspiracy, as these acts cannot be considered as committed in discharge of official duty.
Law Points
- Sanction under Section 197 CrPC is not required for prosecution of public servant for offences of forgery
- cheating
- and criminal conspiracy as these acts cannot be regarded as committed in discharge of official duty
