TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Supreme Court Quashes Criminal Complaint: Debt Adjustments Allowed, Emphasizes Prima Facie Case</h1> <h3>Punjab National Bank and Ors. Versus Surendra Prasad Sinha</h3> The Supreme Court allowed the appeal in a case involving allegations of criminal breach of trust and abetment based on a private complaint filed by an ... - Issues involved: Allegations of criminal breach of trust and abetment under sections 409, 109, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code based on a private complaint filed by an Advocate and Standing Counsel against multiple appellants.Judgment Summary:The Supreme Court granted special leave in a case where the respondent, an Advocate, filed a private complaint alleging criminal offenses against the appellants. The complaint accused the appellants of embezzlement and criminal breach of trust related to a loan transaction and a Fixed Deposit Receipt (F.D.R.) security bond. The respondent claimed that the debt became time-barred, and the appellants failed to credit the full amount to his account, leading to the criminal allegations.The Court analyzed the terms of the security bond and the actions of the bank in adjusting the outstanding debt from the F.D.R. at maturity. It clarified that while the remedy to enforce the debt through a suit may be barred by limitation, the right to the debt itself continues to exist. The Court emphasized that the time-barred debt does not cease to exist, and the creditor has the right to adjust the debt from any payment made by the debtor or from any security held.The Court found that the appellants acted in accordance with the terms of the contract and did not commit criminal breach of trust or misappropriation. It highlighted that the bank had the F.D.R. as security for the debt and lawfully appropriated the amount due from the principal debtor. The Court criticized the Magistrate for mechanically issuing process against all the appellants without determining if a prima facie case was established, leading to unnecessary harassment.The Court stressed that the judicial process should not be used for oppression or harassment. It noted that complaints should be carefully examined to avoid becoming a tool for personal vendettas. Ultimately, the Court allowed the appeal and quashed the complaint, finding that the respondent had abused the legal process without a prima facie case to support the criminal allegations.In conclusion, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, emphasizing the importance of ensuring that legal complaints are not used for personal vendettas and that the judicial process is not abused for harassment purposes.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
