Bank of baroda

BANK OF BARODA
under sections 120B and 409 of the Indian Penal Code alleging criminal conspiracy and criminal breach of trust.
He has alleged that the amount deducted by way of TDS on the interest accrued on his fixed deposit with the
International Business Branch of the Bank at Kolkata was misappropriated and embezzled by some officials of the
Bank and that the money is lying in the custody of the Bank. The Bank filed a petition (CRR No. 1567 of 2004)
before the High Court, Kolkata to quash the abovementioned complaint submitting that an amount in excess of the
amount to be statutorily deducted by way of TDS was mistakenly deducted from the complainant’s account and that
immediately thereafter steps were taken to refund the excess amount. By order dated June 24, 2004 the High Court
stayed the proceedings in C.C. No. 1240 of 2004 till July 15, 2004, which stay has been extended till October 24,
2005 until further notice.
9.
Binod Bihari Tripathi filed a complaint (C.C.No. 1765 (C) of 2002) on August 27, 2002 before the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Patna against Alpic Finance Limited (Alpic), the persons in charge of the management of Alpic and P.S.
Shenoy, the then CMD of the Bank under sections 409, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code alleging criminal
breach of trust, cheating and criminal conspiracy. Alpic had issued bonds under the Alpic Health and Transport
Infrastructure Cumulative Income Bonds Scheme and the Bank was the trustee for the bondholders. The complainant
has submitted that he had purchased 20 bonds jointly with his son, but Alpic did not make the payment after he
had deposited the bonds for encashment/redemption. The complainant has submitted that the accused persons, in
active criminal conspiracy, have criminally misappropriated the complainant’s money and has cheated the
complainant. P.S. Shenoy filed an application under section 205 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the
Judicial Magistrate, Patna for dispensing with his personal attendance before the Court and the same was rejected
by order dated May 1, 2003. He then filed a criminal revision petition (Cr.Rev.No. 459 of 2003) before the High
Court, Patna against the said order and the High Court, by order dated July 29, 2005, granted the petitioner
exemption from personal appearance in C.C.No. 1765 (C) of 2002. The case is pending as of date and the next
date of hearing is December 2, 2005.
10.
One Kusum Bai has filed a complaint under section 190 of the Criminal Procedure Code before the Chief Judicial
Magistrate, Katni, Madhya Pradesh on April 20, 2004 against the Bank through the Bank Manager of Kymore
Branch, Katni, one Sunderlal and one Usha Bai (relatives of the complainant who were living with her) alleging
offences under sections 419, 420, 467 read with section 34, and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. The complainant
had opened two term deposits of Rs. 50,000 each with the Kymore Branch of the Bank. She has alleged that
Sunderlal, pretending to be her husband, got his name entered as joint holder of one the said deposits. The
complainant has alleged that when she objected to the same, the Branch refused to make payment to her. She has
alleged that she had complained to the Police about the same, but no action was taken and that she had, through
her advocate, sent a registered notice to the accused herein, which was also not replied to.
11.
One Raghunath Prasad has filed a complaint before Judicial Magistrate 1
st
Class, Katni, Madhya Pradhesh on
August 11,2005 against Satish Chander (Branch Manager, Kymore Branch of the Bank, Katni) and the Field Officer
(Kymore Branch of the Bank) alleging offences under sections 294, 506B, 384, and 386 read with section 34 of the
Indian Penal Code. The complainant had taken a loan of Rs. 1,80,000 from the Bank for buying a bus. Due to
defaults in paying the installments the Bank had filed a recovery suit in the District Court, Katni, which suit was
decreed. The complainant has alleged that the accused, being unhappy with the payment made by the complainant
according to the compromise arrangement, insulted the complainant at various public functions, threatened the
complainant and his family, and abused the complainant in public.
12.
S. C. Jain and other partners of Siddharth Rice Mills filed a complaint (registerd as Criminal Case No. 396 of 2003)
on April 22, 2003 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhamtari, Chattisgarh against Antony Samy (Manager of
Durg Branch of the Bank, Raipur), T.C. Tekam (Manager of Vivekanand Ashram Branch of the Bank, Raipur), D.P.
Dhawad (Senior Manager, Regional Office of the Bank, Raipur) and another alleging offences under sections 405,
409, 415, 418, 420, 463, 464, 467, 468 and 471 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The complainants have
alleged that the said officials of the Bank unlawfully transferred Rs. 10,00,000, given by Siddarth Rice Mills as
security for enhancement of cash credit limit, into the term loan account of the firm and have thus committed fraud
and cheating. The Chief Judicial Magistrate, on April 8, 2003, passed an order taking cognizance of the offence
under section 420 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code against the Bank officials. The Bank officials filed
Miscellaneous Criminal Case No. 1835 of 2003 before the Chhattisgarh High Court to quash the said order and
proceedings before the Chief Judicial Magistrate. By order dated November 5, 2004 the High Court quashed the
order taking cognizance against T.C. Tekam and D.P. Dhawad but maintained the order taking cognizance and
proceeding the case against Antony Samy. The matter is pending.

---

301
13.
S.C. Jain filed a complaint dated April 16, 2003 before the Additional Sessions Judge, Dhamtari, Chattisgarh
against Guatam Chand Biad (Senior Manager of the Bank, Raipur), D.P. Dhawad (Senior Manager, Regional Office
of the Bank, Raipur) and S. Satyam (Manager of the Bank, Durg) under section 340 of the Criminal Procedure
Code. The Bank had filed a suit for recovery against individuals, including the complainant herein, and had
produced letter of acknowledgment of debt. The complainant has alleged that the Bank has tampered with the date
on the stamp paper attached with the said acknowledgment and has thus committed fraud and produced a forged
document in a judicial proceeding. The Additional Sessions Judge, by order dated August 14, 2003, concluded that
prima facie offences were made under sections 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal
Code and ordered that separate complaints be filed before the Chief Judicial Magistrate against the Bank officials.
The Bank officials, aggrieved by the said order preferred Criminal Appeal No. 1239 of 2003 to the Chhattisgarh
High Court. The complaint was registered as Criminal Case No. 111 of 2004 before the Chief Judicial Magistrate,
Dhamtari wherein order dated October 8, 2004 was passed framing charges under sections 467, 468, 471, 420
read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The bank officials filed Criminal Revision Petition in the Chhattisgarh
High Court against the order dated October 8, 2004, which petition has been dismissed. The matter is still pending.
14.
A criminal complaint (Complaint Case No. 16660/05) was filed by one Ranjit Kumar against the Manager of the
branch of the Bank at Arrah, Bihar and other officers of the Branch. The complainant has alleged fraudulent
withdrawal of Rs. 5,000 and Rs. 59,000 from his savings bank account on November 10, 2005 and November 12,
2005 respectively. Pursuant to a first information report filed by the Bank, some persons have been arrested who
have accepted that they made the fraudulent withdrawals by forging the signature of the complainant.