Case Note & Summary
The applicants, including Ashok Banarsi and his family members, challenged the order of the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Nagpur, dated 22.8.2013, issuing process against them for offences under Sections 381, 468, 469 and 471 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The allegations were that Ashok Banarsi, while employed as an employee of the firm of respondent no. 2 (M/s Gandhi Sales), stole a cheque-book containing blank cheques of the respondent. After resigning, he, in collusion with the other applicants (his relatives), misused those cheques by showing them as issued by respondent no. 2 in their favour. The court heard arguments from both sides. The applicants' counsel contended that there was no prima facie material against the applicants other than Ashok Banarsi, and the process was issued mechanically. The respondent's counsel argued that the allegations were sufficient to proceed against all. The court examined the complaint and the material on record. It found that while there was some material to proceed against applicant no. 1 (Ashok Banarsi) for theft of the cheque-book under Section 381 IPC, there was no specific evidence to show the involvement of the other applicants in the theft or forgery. The court held that the process against applicants no. 2 to 5 in Criminal Application No. 627/2013 and applicants no. 2 and 3 in Criminal Application No. 628/2013 was not sustainable for lack of prima facie case. Accordingly, the court quashed the process against those applicants, but maintained the process against applicant no. 1 in both applications, leaving the trial to proceed against him.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Process Issuance - Prima Facie Case - Sections 381, 468, 469, 471, 34 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court examined whether the magistrate's order issuing process against the applicants was justified. The allegations were that applicant no. 1, while an employee, stole blank cheques of respondent no. 2 and later, with other applicants, misused them. The court held that except for applicant no. 1, there was no prima facie material to show the involvement of other applicants in the alleged offences. The process against them was quashed. (Paras 2-5) B) Criminal Law - Theft by Clerk or Servant - Section 381 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court noted that the allegation of theft of cheque-book by applicant no. 1 while in employment of respondent no. 2 could constitute an offence under Section 381 IPC. However, the court did not quash the process against applicant no. 1, leaving it to be decided at trial. (Para 4) C) Criminal Law - Forgery and Using Forged Documents - Sections 468, 469, 471 Indian Penal Code, 1860 - The court found that the allegations of forgery and using forged cheques were made against all applicants, but there was no specific evidence linking applicants other than applicant no. 1 to the forgery. The process against them was quashed for lack of prima facie case. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the order issuing process for offences under Sections 381, 468, 469 and 471 read with Section 34 of IPC against the applicants was legally sustainable based on the material available on record.
Final Decision
The court quashed the process against applicants no. 2 to 5 in Criminal Application No. 627/2013 and applicants no. 2 and 3 in Criminal Application No. 628/2013. The process against applicant no. 1 in both applications is maintained, and the trial shall proceed against him.
Law Points
- Criminal law
- theft
- forgery
- process issuance
- prima facie case
- Section 381 IPC
- Section 468 IPC
- Section 469 IPC
- Section 471 IPC
- Section 34 IPC
