Prima facie absence of essential offence ingredients justified quashing of criminal proceedings against the bank.

The FIR and accompanying materials were found not to disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences at face value. The restraining order under section 132(3) covered bank lockers, accounts and fixed deposits, while the revocation order referred only to bank accounts, and the bank officers acted on a mistaken reading of that order. The materials did not show dishonest inducement from inception, entrustment, misappropriation, mens rea, common intention, criminal conspiracy, or intentional cooperation. As the allegations did not prima facie support the offences invoked, the criminal proceedings were quashed as an abuse of process under the court's inherent jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the FIR and the materials accompanying it disclosed the prima facie ingredients of the alleged offences so as to justify continuation of the criminal proceedings, and whether the case fell within the categories warranting quashing under the inherent jurisdiction.

Analysis: The restraining order under section 132(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 covered bank lockers, accounts and fixed deposits, but the revocation order referred only to bank accounts. The bank's officers acted on a mistaken reading of the revocation order and the materials did not disclose dishonest inducement from inception, entrustment and misappropriation, or the requisite mens rea for the offences alleged. The allegations also did not establish common intention, criminal conspiracy, or intentional cooperation. On the face of the FIR and complaint, the allegations did not prima facie constitute the offences invoked, and the case answered the settled categories where criminal proceedings may be quashed to prevent abuse of process.

Conclusion: The FIR did not disclose the essential ingredients of the alleged offences and was liable to be quashed against the appellant-bank.

Final Conclusion: The criminal proceedings against the appellant-bank could not be sustained and were set aside.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the FIR and accompanying material, taken at face value, do not prima facie make out the essential ingredients of the alleged offences, the High Court may quash the proceedings under its inherent jurisdiction to prevent abuse of process.

---