2007 INSC 0243
                        SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

                        Manager, ICICI Bank Limited

                           Vs.

                        Prakash Kaur & Ors.

                        Crl.A.No.267 of 2007

                        (Dr.Ar.Lakshmanan and Altamas Kabir, JJ)

                           26.02.2007

                        JUDGMENT

SLP(Crl.)No.15 of 2007

Altamas Kabir, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the Manager, I.C.I.C.I. Bank Ltd. against the order dated 7th
December, 2006, passed by the Allahabad High Court in Criminal Miscellaneous Petition
No.11210/2006 disposing of the petition with a direction upon the S.S.P. Allahabad, to
ensure the registration of a case on the basis of Annexure VII to the Writ Petition and its
investigation by a competent police officer.

2. Before adverting to the subject-matter of the writ petition, it may be pointed out that in the
writ petition, the writ petitioner has chosen to implead as respondents, not only the Union of
India and other police authorities of Uttar Pradesh but also the President/Chairman/Managing
Director of the I.C.I.C.I. Bank, the General Manager, Loans, I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Branch Sardar
Patel Marg, Civil Lines, Allahabad and M/s. Kartik Associates, Banaras Automobiles,
Kodopur, Ram Nagar, Varanasi, through its authorised Goonda Officers and Goonda
Employees and Institutions created against the law for doing work and persons of the
Institutes, Criminals to do work for I.C.I.C.I. Bank.

3. The subject matter of the writ petition relates to a loan taken by the writ petitioner from
the I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Allahabad Branch for purchase of a truck. It appears that the writ
petitioner defaulted in payment of the instalments and in terms of the agreement entered into
between the writ petitioner and the Bank, the writ petitioner's truck was taken possession of
by the bank authorities by use of force on 13th July, 2006. It also appears that the writ
petitioner requested the Chief Manager (Loans), I.C.I.C.I.Bank, Sardar Patel Marg, Civil
Lines, Allahabad, for release of the truck which was alleged to have been forcibly taken
possession of by M/s. Kartik Associates, acting as the agents of the Bank. The writ petitioner
appears to have also written to the said agents on 25th July, 2006, requesting them to provide
details of the instructions given to them to seize the petitioner's truck. Since the truck was not

                        1                                         SpotLaw
returned to the writ petitioner, she caused a legal notice to be served on M/s. Kartik
Associates but the same was returned unserved as having been refused.

4. The writ petitioner contended that the Bank and its officials had systematically conspired
to cheat the writ petitioner by advancing the loan for purchase of the truck and accordingly
wrote to the police authorities on 3rd/4th September, 2006, requesting them to register the
First Information Report of the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 400/ 403/
406/ 409/ 417/ 418/ 419/ 420/ 421/ 422/ 424/ 466/ 467/ 468/ 469/ 571 and 511 IPC. It was
also urged that since no steps had been taken by the police authorities on the basis of the
application dated 3rd/4th September, 2006, the respondent Nos. 1, 2, 5, 6, 7 & 8, being the
Union of India and other officers of the U.P. Police, had committed offences punishable
under Sections 166/ 167/ 212/ 217/ 218/ 221/ 120-B IPC and Section 13 of the Prevention of
Corruption Act.

5. On the basis of the aforesaid allegations, the writ petitioner, interalia, prayed for a
direction upon the respondent Nos. 1, 2 , 4, 5, 6 7 & 8 to register a First Information Report
in Civil Lines Police Station, Allahabad, against the respondent Nos. 9 to 13 and during the
period of investigation, to save the losses of the writ petitioner by recovering the truck along
with all the documents relating to the truck and to hand over the same to the writ petitioner.
The writ petitioner also prayed for a writ of mandamus to direct the respondent Nos. 1 and 3
to cancel the licence of I.C.I.C.I. Bank and for other ancillary reliefs.

6. On the basis of the aforesaid writ application, the Division Bench of the Allahabad High
Court while disposing of the writ petition passed the following order:-

        "The relief sought in this Writ Petition is for issuance of a direction for Registration
        of the case against the Respondents
        .
        Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned AGA for the State and
        perused the record.

        The contention for the learned counsel for the petitioner is that a perusal of
        Application dated 03/09/06 (Annexure VII) to the Writ Petition discloses commission
        of a cognizable offence. It was obligatory on the part of the police to have registered
        the case and to proceed with the investigation but it was not done. The petitioner is a
        lady and she has approached this Court for the relief sought therein and in support of
        his contention he has relied on Ramesh Kumari vs. State (N.C.T. of Delhi) & Ors.,
        reported in1 where"

Judgment Referred.

1(2006) 1 Crimes 229 (SC)

2  SpotLaw