Memos & charge sheet on false grounds in a public sector undertaking
MJS Murthy
(Querist) 26 October 2011
This query is : Resolved
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.
Surendra Gupta
(Expert) 27 October 2011
In my opinion, you have to first exhaust the other remedies before approaching the court for any relief.
Please let me know answers to the following questions:-
1. Where are you now
2. Whether you were Branch Head at the time of incident or Loans Incharge
3. If you were Branch Head, whether you had handed over complete charge of the Branch to your successor or you had given charge to your second man.
4. If you had handed over charge to your successor, whether he had pointed out any irregularity within 6 months of taking over complete charge of the branch
5. How the charges against you surfaced after such a long time
6. Whether you were given personal hearing before the Disciplanry Authority imposed the punishment on you
7. Whether you have appealed to the Bank’s Appellate Authority
8. When your retirement is due
MJS Murthy
(Querist) 27 October 2011
Dear Surendra Guptaji,
1) I am at Hyderabad. The place of incidence also is at Hyderabad
2)The person was the branch head at the time of incidence.
3)The earlier system of handing over the charge to the incumbent branch head is done away with and the branch head hands over the keys either to the incumbent or to the accountant, which he had done as per the prevailing system in the Bank.
4) No irregularities were pointed out till after 4 years nor there were any adverse audit comments.
5) The charges surfaced only after the Branch head pointed out about document tampering of one account where the Regional Head was interested. It is understood that to silence the Branch head, the charges were falsely framed against him so that he would be kept busy / occupied with his own charge sheet instead of making issue of document tampering in another account.
6) No personal hearing from the disciplinary authority before imposing punishment.
7) Yes appeal was filed and appellate declined the appeal.
8) The retirement was more than 3 years due.
umapathi.s
(Expert) 29 October 2011
Dear Murthy, It appears that your case is a genuine one. such incidents are common in Govt owned banks. There is a violation of principle of natural justice in your case since you have not been given the opportunity of hearing before imposition penalty on you.the best option before you is to file a writ petition before AP High Court challenging the imposition of penalty and also requesting for independent investigation by outside agency like the Central vigilance Commission.
Guest
(Expert) 29 October 2011
Dear Murthy,
Definitely, your friend can sue the authorities, but it will be quite premature to do so before the charge sheet is disposed of, as he is likely to lose his criminal case, unless his charges are effectively proved false in the domestic/departmental inquiry on the charge sheet being conducted by the bank.
So, better your friend should first concentrate on effectively defending his case on priority basis.
