LexHDFC BANK LTD. versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2024] 10 S.C.R. 1902 : 2024 INSC 807 HDFC Bank Ltd. v. The State of Bihar & Ors. (Criminal Appeal No. 4324 of 2024) 22 October 2024 [B.R. Gavai* and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration What is the nature of enquiry while determining quashing of a First Information Report u/s.482 Cr.P.C., against a Bank and its Officials. Headnotes† Criminal law – Essential ingredients for offence under Section 420 of IPC – Question of mens rea does not arise for a juristic person: Held: The FIR must disclose the following ingredients to make out an offence u/s.420 : (i) That the Accused has induced anyone since inception; (ii) That the inducement was fraudulent or dishonest; (iii) That mens rea existed at the time of such inducement. The Accused/Bank is a jurisdiction person, and as such, the question of mens rea does not arise. However, on reading of the F.I.R., there is nothing to show that the Accused/Bank or its staff members had dishonestly induced someone to deceived to deliver any property to any person, and that the mens rea existed at the time of such inducement – Thus, the ingredients to attract the offence u/s.420 I.P.C. would not be available. [Paras 20 and 21] Criminal law – Section 482 CrPC – Quashing of FIR – Prima facie inquiry as to whether the ingredients of the offence in the FIR are made out or not. Criminal law – Essential ingredients for offence under Section 406, 409 and 462 of IPC: Held: The following ingredients will have to be made out for the offence u/s.409 I.P.C. – (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 – For bringing out the case under criminal breach of * Author [2024] 10 S.C.R. 1903 HDFC Bank Ltd. v. The State of Bihar & Ors. 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 – In the present case, there is no allegation of entrustment of property which the Accused/Bank has misappropriated, and thus, the provisions of Section 406 and 409 I.P.C. are not applicable – Since there was no entrustment of any property with the Accused/Bank, the ingredients of Section 462 I.P.C. are also not applicable. [Paras 22 to 25] Criminal Law – Quashing of F.I.R.: Held: Relied upon the Judgment in State of Haryana and others v. Bhajan Lal and Others, [1990] Supp. 3 SCR 259 : 1990 INSC 363 : (1992) Supp. 1 SCC 335, wherein it was held that an F.I.R. can be quashed where the allegations in the F.I.R. do not disclose a cognizable offence, or where the uncontroverted allegations made in the F.I.R. and the evidence collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence. [Paras 28 and 29] Case Law Cited Arnab Manoranjan Goswami v. State of Maharashtra & Ors. [2020] 11 SCR 896 : 2020 INSC 665 : (2021) 2 SCC 427 – relied upon State of Haryana and Others v. Bhajan Lal and Others [1990] Supp. 3 SCR 259 : 1990 INSC 363 : (1992) Supp. 1 SCC 335 – relied upon. List of Acts Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Penal Code, 1860. List of Keywords Quashing of F.I.R.; Ingredients of offence u/s.420 IPC; Ingredients of offence u/ss.406 and 409 IPC. Case Arising From CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal No. 4324 of 2024 From the Judgment and Order dated 08.06.2022 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in CWJC No. 1375 of 2021 1904 [2024] 10 S.C.R. Digital Supreme Court Reports Appearances for Parties Neeraj Kishan Kaul, Sr. Adv., Vikram B. Trivedi, Faisal Sayyed, Nagarkatti Kartik Uday, Sanidhya Kumar, Ms. Pritha Suri, Advs. for the Appellant. Manish Kumar, Divyansh Mishra, Venkatraman Chandrashekhara Bharathi, H R Rao, Ms. Priyanka Terdal, Udai Khanna, Shashank Bajpai, Advs. for the Respondents. Judgment / Order of the Supreme Court Judgment B.R. Gavai, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. This appeal challenges the judgment and order dated 8th June, 2022 passed by the learned Single Bench of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Criminal Writ Jurisdiction Case No. 1375 of 2021 wherein the learned Single Judge dismissed the Writ Petition preferred by the present appellant, HDFC Bank1, to quash the First Information Report2 being Case No. 549 of 2021 registered at Gandhi Maid
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.