TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (10) TMI 1212
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts which give rise to the present appeal are as under:- 3.1 In October, 2021, Smt. Priyanka Sharma, Deputy Director of Income Tax (Investigation), Unit-2(2), Respondent No. 5 in the present proceedings, conducted a search and seizure operation in the case of several income-tax assessees including Shri Sunil Khemka (HUF), Smt. Sunita Khemka and Smt. Shivani Khemka at the third floor of Khataruka Niwas, South Gandhi Maidan, Patna. The said search and seizure operation was conducted on the basis of warrants of authorization issued under Section 132(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 'IT Act' for short. During the course of the search, it was found that Smt. Sunita Khemka held a bank locker bearing No. 462 in the appellant-bank at its Exhibition Road Branch, Patna. 3.2 On the basis of the said operation, on 5th October, 2021, an order under Section 132(3) of the IT Act was served upon the Branch Manager of the appellant-bank at its Exhibition Road Branch, Patna by the concerned Authorized Officer, thereby directing the said branch of the appellant-bank to stop the operation of any bank lockers, bank accounts and fixed deposits standing in the names of Shri Sunil Khemka (HUF), Smt.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Operation Manager and Deepak Kumar-Teller Authoriser being the concerned officials of the appellant-bank at its aforementioned branch. 3.8 The aforementioned officials attended the office of Respondent No. 5 and their statements were recorded wherein Abha Sinha and Abhishek Kumar stated that there had been an inadvertent error on the part of the bank officials and they had misinterpreted the order dated 1st November, 2021. Since the said order pertained to the bank accounts of the concerned individuals including Smt. Sunita Khemka, the bank officials had misread the order to understand /assume that the revocation of the restraint extended to the bank lockers as well. Having misunderstood the order, the bank officials under a bona fide assumption that bank locker had been released as well, allowed Smt. Sunita Khemka to operate the same. 3.9 The statement of Smt. Sunita Khemka had also been recorded wherein she stated that her accountant Surendra Prasad, after speaking with Deepak Kumar, had informed her that the restraint on the aforementioned bank locker had been revoked and she could operate the said locker. This was specifically denied by Deepak Kumar in his statement. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d that it is settled law that the High Court while considering a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. for quashing the FIR must examine as to whether prima facie the ingredients of the offence have been made out in the FIR or not. In this regard, a reference is placed on the judgment of this Court in the case of Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra and others (2021) 2 SCC 427 and in the case of Delhi Race Club (1940) Ltd. and others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and another 2024 SCC OnLine SC 2248. 7. Shri Kaul, relying on the judgments of this Court in the case of State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and others 1992 Supp. (1) SCC 335, submits that the continuation of the prosecution of the appellant-bank and/or its staff under IPC would amount to undue hardship and miscarriage of justice. 8. Shri Manish Kumar, learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents Nos. 1 to 4, on the contrary, submits that the High Court while exercising powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. cannot conduct a mini trial. It is submitted that this Court in the case of R. Venkatkrishnan v. Central Bureau of Investigation (2009) 11 SCC 737 has held that though a bank or a fina....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ar Vyapaar Pvt. Ltd. 14. Lord Dealcom Pvt. Ltd. 15. Paramount Financial Management 16. Maa Jagdamba Seva Samiti Trust 2. The contravention of this order shall render you liable, under section 275A of the Income-Tax Act, 1961, to punishment of rigorous imprisonment which may extend to two years and also render you liable to fine. 3. You are requested to intimate the balance standing in these accounts IMMEDIATELY to the bearer of this letter and send a statement of the said accounts since the opening of the accounts along with copy of account opening form to this office within 7 (seven) days of receipt of this order." 13. It will also be relevant to refer to the Revocation Order dated 1st November 2021, issued by the Deputy Director of Income-Tax (Inv.) Unit-2(2), Guwahati, which reads thus: "Sub : Revocation of order under section 132(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in respect of Bank Accounts, Lockers, Fixed Deposits, etc.-reg. Ref:- This office's letter No.DIN/AC/DDIT/U 2(2)/GHY/2021-22, dated 05.10.2021. In this connection this is to state that, restrain order u/s 132(3) of the Income ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of architecture, interior design and engineering consultancy. According to the informant, her husband was over the previous two years "having pressure as he did not receive the money of work carried out by him". The FIR recites that the deceased had called at the office of the appellant and spoken to his accountant for the payment of money. Apart from the above statements, it has been stated that the deceased left behind a suicide note stating that his "money is stuck and following owners of respective companies are not paying our legitimate dues". Prima facie, on the application of the test which has been laid down by this Court in a consistent line of authority which has been noted above, it cannot be said that the appellant was guilty of having abetted the suicide within the meaning of Section 306 IPC. These observations, we must note, are prima facie at this stage since the High Court is still to take up the petition for quashing. Clearly however, the High Court in failing to notice the contents of the FIR and to make a prima facie evaluation abdicated its role, functions and jurisdiction when seized of a petition under Section 482 CrPC. The High Court recited the legal positi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....heir face value, there is nothing to show that the appellant-bank or its staff members had dishonestly induced someone deceived to deliver any property to any person, and that the mens rea existed at the time of such inducement. As such, the ingredients to attract the offence under Section 420 IPC would not be available. 22. Insofar as the provisions of Section 409 IPC is concerned, the following ingredients will have to be made out: (a) That there has been any entrustment with the property, or with any dominion over property on a person in the capacity of a public servant or banker, etc.; (b) That the said person commits criminal breach of trust in respect of that property. 23. For bringing out the case under criminal breach of trust, it will have to be pointed out that a person, with whom entrustment of a property is made, has dishonestly misappropriated it, or converted it to his own use, or dishonestly used it, or disposed of that property. 24. In the present case, there is not even an allegation of entrustment of the property which the appellant-bank has misappropriated or converted for its own use to the detriment of the respondent No.5. As such, th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....a case against the accused. (4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an order of a Magistrate as contemplated under Section 155(2) of the Code. (5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. (6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party. (7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge. 103. We also give a not....