STATE OF U.P. THROUGH C.B.I. S.P.E. LUCKNOW versus R.K. SRIVASTAVA AND ANOTHER.

Citation: [1989] 3 S.C.R. 834 · Decided: 11-08-1989 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: M.M. DUTT · Disposal: Disposed off

Judgment (excerpt)

' 
STATE OF U.P. THROUGH C.B.I. S.P.E. LUCKNOW 
A 
v. 
R.K. SRIVASTAVA AND ANOTHER. 
AUGUST 11, 1989 
B 
[MURARI MOHON DUTT, S. RATNAVEL PANDIAN AND ~ 
T.K. THOMMEN, JJ.] 
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973: Section 154-F.I.R.-Al/ega-
tions contained in FIR taken on face value and accepted in entirety do .,_, 
not constitute offence-Whether criminal proceedings could be ; , 
quashed. 
I 
c 
~ 
The respondents, two employees of a nationalised Bank and two 
account-holders, were charged with offences punishable under Sections 
120B, 420, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 5(2) read with Section 5(l)(d) of the 
Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947. The F .I.R. alleged that the two 
\ 
D Bank employees entered into a criminal conspiracy with the two 
account-holders to cheat the Bank and, in pursuance thereof an amount 
of Rs.54,600 was allowed to be withdrawn by the account-holders, 
who had tendered three cheques aggregating to Rs.54,600, on the basis 
of the false credit entries in the books of accounts of the Bank, and ~ 
connected credit and debit-vouchers were also prepared. The case 
E against one of the account-holders was tater dropped. 
i; 
The High Court quashed the proceedings only against Respondent 
No. l on the ground that the allegations made in the F .I.R. did not 
constitute any offence of cheating or forgery. Against this decision, the 
Quashing the proceedings against all the respondents, 
State as well as the Bank filed appeals in this Court. 
·~
HELD: l. If the allegations made in the FIR taken at their face 
value and accepted in their entirety do nut constitute an offence, the 
criminal proceedings instituted on the basis of such FIR should be 
G quashed. [837C] 
In the instant case, the Respondent No. l and the other accused ""· 
had accepted the three cheques in question and sent the same for clea-
rance after debiting the LOC account. The cheques were encashed and 
the money was received by the Bank. It may be that there was some 
H delay in crediting the LOC account or that the money against the three 
834 
, 
STAIB OF U.P. v. R.K. SRIVASTAVA [DUTT, J.) 
835 
cheques were credited in the accounts of the account-holders, but the 
allegations made either in the FIR or in the charge-sheet do not show 
that they had acted dishonestly, or with deliberate intention to cause 
wrongful gain or wrongful loss to the Bank. When the amount was 
allowed to be withdrawn by the account-holders, necessary entries had 
to be made in the accounts of the Bank and these entries cannot be 
characterised as false. No document has been referred to in the FIR as 
the outcome of forgery. [837E-F, 838A] 
A 
B 
The High Court was, therefore, right in holding that the allega-
tions made in the FIR did not constitute any offence of cheating or 
forgery and that as the criminal proceedings had been started on the 
basis of a FIR which did not contain any definite accusation and it C 
amounted to an abuse of process of the Court, they were liable to be 
quashed. [837G, 838B] 
Since the allegations in the FIR are the same against all the 
accused persons, the entire proceedings as against all the accused 
persons should be quashed. Accordingly, the entire criminal proceed-
ings are quashed. [838C] 
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION: Criminal Appeal 
Nos. 380 of 1989 anJ 323 of 1988. 
From the Judgment and Order dated 28.1.1988 of the Allahabad 
High Court in Cr!. Misc. Appln. No. 995 of 1987. 
G. Ramaswamy, Additional Solicitor General, Anil Dev Singh, 
Miss A. Subhashini and R.P. Kapur for the Appellants. 
R.L. Kohli, Manoj Saxena and R.D. Upadhyay for the Res-
pondents .. 
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by 
DUTT, J. These two appeals by special leave, one preferred by 
the State of U.P. and the other by the State Bank oflndia, are directed 
against the judgment of the Allahabad High Court whereby the High 
Court has quashed the criminal proceedings being Crime Case No. 40 
of 1983 in the Court of Special Judge, Anti-Corruption, only as against 
the respondent R.K. Srivastava. In quashing the proceedings in the 
exercise of its jurisdiction under section 482 Cr. P.C., the High Court 
took the view that allegations made in the first Information Report 
D 
E 
F 
G 
H 
836 
SUPREME COURT REPORTS 
[1989] 3 S.C.R. 
A (FIR) did not constitute any offence. In order to appreciate the view of 
~. 
the High Court, it is necessary to refer to the FIR which reads as 
follows: 
B 
c 
D 
E 
F 
"An information has been received that Shri P.C. Saxena 
an

Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.