MJS Murthy
26 October 2011 at 11:21
One of my friends, who is an officer in a public sector bank, is served with memo and followed by charge sheet on false grounds in a public sector bank where the inquiries are conducted by the bank's own internal staff or a retired official as external inquiry authority. The case is my friend is charge sheeted on the grounds that he has not taken the 1)security documents in one account 2)released the security documents without adjusting the loan outstanding in another account.
The crux of the case is that he had taken the security documents and also released the documents under the written advise of the Regional Head. He was transferred from the branch and after a gap of 4 years, they charges him on the above counts on two different accounts. In the inquiry proceedings it came out that 1) the security documents are taken and available in the Bank and 2) the second case the security documents were released after taking the signature of the property owners and also after putting his signature as an officer authorised to release the documents. This was done with written permission from the Regional Head. The branch is subject to concurrent audit where the branch is under daily audit for the transactions of the day by Concurrent auditors. The permission letter from the Regional Head was maliciously removed from the Branch records.
There was no adverse comment by either concurrent auditors (who audit the daily transactions of the branch on day to day basis) or internal auditors (who audit the branch atleast once an year) and also there were no adverse comments by statutory auditors when the memo was served regarding release of document or not taking security documents. He was having open rivalry with the Regional Head on various counts.
Despite the above established evidences, he was punished with one increment cut on false charges as the Bank staff do not have any appellate authority outside the bank where he can approach and explain for exoneration.
Please guide whether we can file 1) case against the authority who charge sheeted the officer under Section 211 IPC - wrongful charges with an intention to criminally conspire to fix a person on false charges - false charges of offence made with an intention to injure.
2) Sec 167 IPC - Public servant framing an incorrect document with intent to cause injury.
3) Sec 177 IPC - Furnishing false information.
4) Sec 181 IPC - False statement on oath (witness in the case who gave false statement and subsequently withdrew)
5) Sec 182 IPC - false information with intent cause public servant to use his lawful power to the injury of another person.
6) Sec 191 IPC - Giving false evidence
7)Sec 192 IPC - Fabricating false evidence
8) Sec 196 - Using evidence known to be false.
9) Sec 219 - Public servant in judicail proceedings corruptly making report etc contrary to law
10) Sec 425 - Mischief
11) Sec 471 - Using as genuine a forged document
Whether my friend can proceed criminally against the Bank and also against the external inquiry authority, the presenting officer and also against the witnesses who gave false witness.Whether he can file defamation against the Bank for falsely implicating him. If so what amount he can claim as defamation amount. Whether the officials involved in falsely framing an innocent can be convicted with jail term and if so what is the maximum jail term we can expect. Kindly guide me in the matter.
MJS Murthy
08 May 2010 at 11:17
In a departmental inquiry where a top official is involved it has come out that the entire correcspondence from the next higher office is repleced with other letters with the same reference number and date. Fortunately the officer concerned has retained xerox copies of some of the letters emanated from the higher office. The Inquiry athority without giving logic didnot accept the copies furnished by the officer. This I think is nothing but document tampering, fudging. Whether the officer can file criminal conspiracy case against the higher office & inquiry Officer. Similarly the process note that was submitted by the officer was replaced with another process note retaining only the last page of the note where the officers full signature is available. The officer was transferred before the credit proposal was sanctioned. The credit proposal was sanctioned after he was transferred from the Branch. The case pertains to a public sector Bank. Whether a criminal conspiracy, defamation case can be filed in the matter.
© 2025 LAWyersclubindia.com. Let us grow stronger by mutual exchange of knowledge.
Public interest litigation
When PIL is filed in a High Court, is it necessary that only Chief Justice of the High Court should hear before admitting the case.
Whether Chief Justice can dismiss the case even before admitting PIL without assigning any reasons.