R. REGUPATHI, J.: At the time of passing orders in the above petitions on previous occasions and while taking up similar such matters for inquiry, the attention of this Court was drawn to the illegal practice adopted by some of the Magistrates mechanically passing orders without application of mind directing for registration of criminal case and police investigation in matters of civil nature. Since the issue relates to propriety of the subordinate judiciary and such erroneous and illegal orders are passed in spite of repeated cautioning by the Supreme Court and this Court, taking serious note of the same, these petitions were directed to be listed for further orders to-day. 2. It is stated that, in many private complaints preferred, where the dispute between the parties is purely of civil nature or the allegations do not disclose commission of any cognizable offence so as to pass an order under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C., cryptic one line orders for police investigation are being passed by some Magistrates. Some of those complaints should have been dismissed in limini at the fist sight or the Magistrate concerned could have himself taken up the proceedings as provided in Chapter XIV Cr.P.C. Deviation in this regard on the part of some Magistrates is rampant leading to multiplicity of proceedings and unwarranted police investigations to the aid of crooked complainants and dismay of persons, who did not indulge in any criminal offence. 3-A. The Supreme Court in Anil Mahajan v. Bhor Industries Ltd. (2005) 10 SCC 228 ), observed thus: “ 8. The substance of the complaint is to be seen. Mere use of the expression “cheating” in the complaint is of no consequence. Except mention of the words “deceive” and “cheat” in the complaint filed before the Magistrate and “cheating” in the complaint filed before the police, there is no averment about the deceit, cheating or fraudulent intention of the accused at the time of entering into MOU wherefrom it can be inferred that the accused had the intention to deceive the complainant to pay.” B. In Verma v. State of Bihar ( (2000) 4 SCC 168 ), it was held as follows:- “ 15. ..... Mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction that is the time when the offence is said to have been committed. ..... Mere breach of contract cannot give rise to criminal prosecution for cheating unless fraudulent or dishonest intention is shown right at the beginning of the transaction that is the time when the offence is said to have been committed. Therefore it is the intention which is the gist of the offence. To hold a person guilty of cheating it is necessary to show that he had fraudulent or dishonest intention at the time of making the promise. From his mere failure to keep up promise subsequently such a culpable intention right at the beginning, that is, when he made the promise cannot be presumed.” C. In Alpic Finance Ltd. v. P. Sadasivan, (2001) 3 SCC 513 , it has been ruled as under :- " 10. ..... To deceive is to induce a man to believe that a thing is true which is false and which the person practising the deceit knows or believes to be false. It must also be shown that there existed a fraudulent and dishonest intention at the time of commission of the offence. There is no allegation that the respondents made any wilful misrepresentation. Even according to the appellant, the parties entered into a valid lease agreement and the grievance of the appellant is that the respondents failed to discharge their contractual obligations. In the complaint, there is no allegation that there was fraud or dishonest inducement on the part of the respondents and thereby the respondents parted with the property. It is trite law and common sense that an honest man entering into a contract is deemed to represent that he has the present intention of carrying it out but if, having accepted the pecuniary advantage involved in the transaction, he fails to pay his debt, he does not necessarily evade the debt by deception." D. There may also be cases which are of a mixed or composite kind involving both civil disputes and criminal offences. In such cases, the test to be applied is as to whether the allegations in the complaint disclose a criminal offence or not. In that perspective, it is pertinent to point out here the observation of the Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. (2006) 6 SCC 736 ):- " 13. In such cases, the test to be applied is as to whether the allegations in the complaint disclose a criminal offence or not. In that perspective, it is pertinent to point out here the observation of the Supreme Court in Indian Oil Corporation v. NEPC India Ltd. (2006) 6 SCC 736 ):- " 13. While on this issue, it is necessary to take notice of a growing tendency in business circles to convert purely civil disputes into criminal cases. This is obviously on account of a prevalent impression that civil law remedies are time consuming and do not adequately protect the interests of lenders/creditors. Such a tendency is seen in several family disputes also, leading to irretrievable breakdown of marriages/families. There is also an impression that if a person could somehow be entangled in a criminal prosecution, there is a likelihood of imminent settlement. Any effort to settle civil disputes and claims, which do not involve any criminal offence, by applying pressure through criminal prosecution should be deprecated and discouraged. In G. Sagar Suri v. State of U.P.1 this Court observed: (SCC p.643, para 8) “It is to be seen if a matter, which is essentially of a civil nature, has been given a cloak of criminal offence. Criminal proceedings are not a short cut of other remedies available in law. Before issuing process a criminal court has to exercise a great deal of caution. For the accused it is a serious matter. This Court has laid certain principles on the basis of which the High Court is to exercise its jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code. Jurisdiction under this section has to be exercised to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice." 14. While no one with a legitimate cause or grievance should be prevented from seeking remedies available in criminal law, a complainant who initiates or persists with a prosecution, being fully aware that the criminal proceedings are unwarranted and his remedy lies only in civil law, should himself be made accountable, at the end of such misconceived criminal proceedings, in accordance with law. One positive step that can be taken by the courts, to curb unnecessary prosecutions and harassment of innocent parties, is to exercise their power under Section 250 CrPC more frequently, where they discern malice or frivolousness or ulterior motives on the part of the complainant. Be that as it may." (emphasis supplied) E. A case relating to illegal practice of a Bank/Financial Institution employing Goondas, middlemen and musclemen to recover the dues from the borrower was dealt with by the Supreme Court in ICICI Bank Limited v. Prakash Kaur ( 2007 (2) SCC 711 ). Discouraging such practice, it has been concluded thus:- " 16. Before we part with this matter, we wish to make it clear that we do not appreciate the procedure adopted by the Bank in removing the vehicle from the possession of the writ petitioner. The practice of hiring recovery agents, who are muscle men, is deprecated and needs to be discouraged. The Bank should resort to procedure recognised by law to take possession of vehicles in cases where the borrower may have committed default in payment of the instalments instead of taking resort to strong arm tactics." On various issues surrounding the current banking system, the modes adopted for recovery, customer relationship, etc., certain observations have been made in the aforesaid decision and relevant portions thereof are quoted below:- " (1) Regarding the role of recovery agents — Use of abusive language — Due process of law — RBI guidelines Factors: The issue of banks employing alternate means of recovery other than by due process of law i.e. either through courts, tribunals, adalats or commissions is an issue that has to be viewed from two angles (1) from the angle of the common man, and (2) from the angle of the bank. Reasons: First of all, the entrance of the multinational banks into the country has spread the culture of credit cards, loans on an unimaginable level where rather than the rich, it is the middle class, the lower middle class and the lower class who are at the receiving end of the bonanzas promised by the banks. Reasons: First of all, the entrance of the multinational banks into the country has spread the culture of credit cards, loans on an unimaginable level where rather than the rich, it is the middle class, the lower middle class and the lower class who are at the receiving end of the bonanzas promised by the banks. Inadequate information on the credit card application, loan applications, advertisements or even while meeting the bankers in person in respect of the lending rates and hidden charges, leads to this class of people being lured into buying of the credit cards or taking of the home loan or education loan without knowing the ramifications of non-payment and default. The first mistake here is most definitely on the part of the bank who does not believe in educating the masses regarding the promises. Once the credit card or loan is taken and there appears a default, then the witch-hunt begins. Now the bank is the aggressor and the public is the victim. The first step to recovery of the money due is through the so-called recovery/collection agents. A very dignified term used for paid recovery agents who are individual and independent contractors hired by the banks both to trace the defaulters and to physically, mentally and emotionally torture and force them into submitting their dues. A man’s self-respect, stature in society are all immaterial to the agent who is only primed at recovery. This is the modernised version of Shylock’s pound of flesh. No explanation is given regarding the interest charge and the bank takes cover under the guise of the holder of the card or loan having signed the agreement whose fine print is never read or explained to the owner. When a harassed man approaches the court or the police station he is not armed with a recording phone and finds it difficult to give evidence of the abuse he has suffered. Here the bank gets away with everything. Young and old members of the family are threatened on streets, institutions and also at home at godforsaken hours by these agents who have the full support of their contractor bank. Here the bank gets away with everything. Young and old members of the family are threatened on streets, institutions and also at home at godforsaken hours by these agents who have the full support of their contractor bank. The stance taken by the bank in any suit alleging such incidents is that no such agent has been appointed by them or their agents do not misbehave in the manner aforesaid and if found guilty the agents have to bear the cross and the bank gets away scot-free. Using of the abusive language for recovery is the norm of the day for most nationalised or multinational banks or non-nationalised banks. Though some are smart enough to record the abuse and proceed to establish the same through the court of law, most of them are unfortunate not to have recourse to it. Such people form the majority and such litigations are pending in large volumes before the civil and consumer courts. Again the banks escape liability since these agents are not salaried employees of the bank and hence not directly liable for anything. Taking it from the angle of the common man the inflow of software money and high salaries has resulted in uncontrolled expenditure. Rather than utility, it is a fashion to carry a card for it makes a statement depending on the type of card one carries. To maintain one’s image one pays the price of utilising the card without realising that even a single day’s delay in payment results in more than 100 to 200 rupees being charged as default and penalty charges, which if accumulates over a month, results in the charges exceeding the actual payment due. As for loans, when litigation is commenced by the customer against the bank or an institution, then they refuse to divulge the true statement of account stating that it will be produced in court. This gives ample scope for manipulation." One of the suggestions made at para No.23 is relevant and it is extracted here-under:- " 23. .... loans whether they are personal loans or credit cards or housing loan with less than Rs.10 lakhs exposure, can be referred to Lok Adalat which can be specially created for resolving the issues between the banks and the borrowers. .... loans whether they are personal loans or credit cards or housing loan with less than Rs.10 lakhs exposure, can be referred to Lok Adalat which can be specially created for resolving the issues between the banks and the borrowers. In fact, the Lok Adalat should be used as an effective machinery to resolve the issues and concentrate with reference to keeping the fine balance between the banks and borrowers. ..... " 4. Though the appalling conduct of the financial institutions/Banks in adopting such illegal method by employing thugs and rowdy elements for collection of dues has been discouraged by the orders of the Apex Court, as pointed out, a novel system of filing private complaints before some Judicial Magistrates and securing a direction to register a criminal case by police in disputes of civil nature is in vogue. It is the allegation of the Bar that knowing fully well that such complaints deserve to be dismissed at the door-sill, because of the veiled understanding between the Banks and some Magistrates, orders are lavishly passed on private complaints relating to credit card transactions, personal loans, housing and vehicle loans etc., where most of the disputes involved are purely of civil nature. A fine example is the present cases on hand. Crl.O.P. No.15451 of 2008 is a case relating to personal loan transaction. All relevant materials could be made available by the complainant before the Magistrate by way of documentary evidence including statement of accounts. In a clear case for recovery of arrears or balance dues, such orders have been secured. In Crl.O.P. No.15981 of 2008, the petitioner/widow approached the complainant/Bank after the death of her husband to verify as to whether any amount is available in the Account operated by her husband with the Bank, whereupon, she was informed that a sum of Rs.20 lakhs is available in his name. After verification of necessary particulars/documents, the Bank released the money in favour of the petitioner and the poor widow withdrew the amount to settle the debts of her husband. After few days, the Bank realized the mistake that there was no money in the account of petitioner's husband and that the sum allowed to be withdrawn was actually in the deposit of some other account holder with the same name as that of the petitioner's husband. After few days, the Bank realized the mistake that there was no money in the account of petitioner's husband and that the sum allowed to be withdrawn was actually in the deposit of some other account holder with the same name as that of the petitioner's husband. Immediately, a complaint was given to the Inspector of Police, F-3 Nungambakkam Police Station, and the said Police Officer, without even registering a case, took it as a 'petition enquiry', went to the residence of the petitioner along with Bank Officials and recovered Rs.9.50 lakhs from her. Keeping the enquiry pending, she was threatened for payment of balance amount. She only requested to grant some more time for re-payment, however, since the threat from police and Bank continued, she approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail and by order dated 02.01.2008 passed in Crl.O.P. No.35589 of 2007, such relief was granted with conditions and one such condition is to appear before the police. The Bank/complainant suppressing those aspects, filed a private complaint before the learned Magistrate and though the case is purely of civil nature, a cryptic order, without application of mind, was passed directing the CCB to register a case and investigate into the matter and subsequent thereto, sincerely, the complaint was taken up on file by the Inspector of Police, Team III, Central Crime Branch, Chennai, on 21.04.2008. The respondent-CCB along with Bank Officials went to the residence of the petitioner and demanded payment of the balance due. Since the money was already disbursed for settlement of debts of her husband, the poor widow expressing her inability, sought for some respite to make payment. But the sincere and duty-minded police officer, with the assistance of the Bank officials, arrested the petitioner and sent her to judicial custody. When the order of this Court was produced, she was only abused and no heedful attention was paid to that order. She was in Puzhal Jail for about 20 days and by order of this Court dated 10.07.2008, she has been directed to be released on bail on executing own bond for Rs.10,000/-. Thus, in both the cases where there is nothing to order for investigation by police, random orders have been passed by the Magistrates with an oblique motive to convert a civil case into a criminal case. Thus, in both the cases where there is nothing to order for investigation by police, random orders have been passed by the Magistrates with an oblique motive to convert a civil case into a criminal case. In the name of investigation, the complainants have collected money from the petitioners through police. The other side of the issue is that such unwarranted exercise on the part of the Magistrates has led to piling up of proceedings at the bottom level adversely affecting the smooth functioning of the system and wastage of valuable judicial time. It is apparent that the intention of the complainant/Bankers is not to conduct proceedings before the Magistrate but only to use the order as a tool to reach the police and for the police, to threaten and harass the debtors so that they could collect the dues unpaid to the Bankers/Creditors. The police are fully aware that the dispute is purely of a civil nature and they are not bound to register a case, however, they are ready to resort to illegal practice to be sincere to the request of the Bank/Financial Institution and to obediently function as their collection agents for receiving pecuniary benefits. 5. Before even condemning the attitude and approach of the police, judicial propriety demands that this Court should initiate suitable action against those judicial officers who knowingly collude with the complainant/Banks to grant such orders. Repeated judicial pronouncements of the Apex Court and orders passed by this Court, discouraging such practice, were never taken care of. Such practice in flagrant violation of the procedure prescribed in the code and pronouncements of the Apex Court as well this Court cannot be tolerated any more. 6. Article 141 of the Constitution of India reads as follows:- "141. Law declared by Supreme Court to be binding on all courts.— The law declared by the Supreme Court shall be binding on all courts within the territory of India." In 2002(4) SCC 388 (Rupa Ashok Hurra v. Ashok Hurra) it has been held that the law declared by Supreme Court is the law of the land and a precedent for itself and for all court/tribunals and authorities in India. In Bengal Iron Corporation v. C.T.O. (1994 Supp (1) SCC 310), it has been held that Law is what is declared by the Supreme Court and the High Court. In Bengal Iron Corporation v. C.T.O. (1994 Supp (1) SCC 310), it has been held that Law is what is declared by the Supreme Court and the High Court. The observation of the Supreme Court in Dwarikesh Sugar Industries Ltd. v. Prem Heavy Engineering Works (P) Ltd., (1997) 6 SCC 450 , is of much relevance and it is extracted below : " 32. When a position, in law, is well settled as a result of judicial pronouncement of this Court, it would amount to judicial impropriety to say the least, for the subordinate courts including the High Courts to ignore the settled decisions and then to pass a judicial order which is clearly contrary to the settled legal position. Such judicial adventurism cannot be permitted and we strongly deprecate the tendency of the subordinate courts in not applying the settled principles and in passing whimsical orders which necessarily has the effect of granting wrongful and unwarranted relief to one of the parties. It is time that this tendency stops. " In Palitana Sugar Mills (P) Ltd. v. State of Gujarat, (2004) 12 SCC 645 , the Supreme Court ruled thus : " 62. It is well settled that the judgments of this Court are binding on all the authorities under Article 141 of the Constitution and it is not open to any authority to ignore a binding judgment of this Court on the ground that the full facts had not been placed before this Court and/or the judgment of this Court in the earlier proceedings had only collaterally or incidentally decided the issues raised in the show-cause notices. Such an attempt to belittle the judgments and the orders of this Court, to say the least, is plainly perverse and amounts to gross contempt of this Court. " (emphasis supplied) In Punjab National Bank V. Manjeet Singh ( 2006 (8) SCC 647 ), the Apex Court reiterated that judicial discipline to abide by declaration of law by the Supreme Court cannot be forsaken under any authority or court, be it even the highest court in a State, oblivious to Art.141 of the Constitution. Thus, by an express constitutional provision viz., Article 141, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India. Proprio vigore the law is binding on all the tribunals and authorities. Thus, by an express constitutional provision viz., Article 141, the law declared by the Supreme Court is binding on all courts in India. Proprio vigore the law is binding on all the tribunals and authorities. Similarly the High Courts are empowered under Article 227 of the Constitution and Sections-482 and 483 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. That being so, can it even be imagined that after a law is declared by the Supreme Court and followed by the High Court, some of the Magistrates are dare enough to act in a way transgressing or violating such law. If there is any such instance, the High court having the power of superintendence over all subordinate courts is under an obligation to remedy such situation by taking stringent action. 7. The Subordinate Judiciary is the backbone of the judicial system, for, the litigant public, in many cases, at the first instance, come into contact with the Subordinate Judiciary essentially. The quality and behavior of the Subordinate Judiciary is the yardstick by which the society would judge how the Judiciary in the country is functioning. Thus, a big responsibility lies on the shoulders of the Subordinate Judiciary, and the High Court, being watchdog over its functioning, is committed to ensure impartiality, fairness and transparency at all levels and safeguard it from being exposed to pollution of corruption and malpractice. The Magistrates, who have been bestowed with the power to decide at the preliminary stage as to whether a matter presented by way of private complaint be forwarded for investigation by the police or taken cognizance of or dismissed at the threshold, should be alive to their responsibility and must decide the matter justly and judiciously by applying their mind to the allegations made and materials produced. Failure to forward a proper case for police investigation or refusal to take cognizance in genuine cases by giving a go-bye to the procedure adumbrated under the Code would result in injustice to the complainant and equally, forwarding a complaint which does not involve criminal offence and a matter purely of civil nature would not only result in injustice to the opposite party and unnecessary harassment at the hands of police but also multiplicity of proceedings resulting in huge pendency of cases, a big problem being experienced by the Judiciary at all levels. It must be borne in mind that Judiciary of any nation cannot survive when it compromises with impartiality. Judicial Officers, who have no honesty, integrity and propriety has no business to be where they are. When courts are giving sermons and admonitions to the Government and the Executive to correct the wrongs and act properly where instances of violation and transgression of law are brought to notice, when such felonies are prevalent in the secondary quarters of judiciary itself, is it not the pious obligation to take serious note of the same and plunge into action with extraordinary rigour without giving any room for raising questions on the credentials of judiciary and its functioning. 8. In this view of the matter, I deem it necessary that an initial enquiry be conducted for collecting materials and such onerous and arduous task be entrusted to the Registrar (Vigilance), High Court, Madras. Accordingly, the Registrar (Vigilance), is directed to collect the statistics regarding private complaints relating to credit cards, personal loans, housing loans, hire-purchase loans, default in payment of instalments, cases under Section 138 Negotiable Instrument Act, etc., which involve disputes purely of civil nature, wherein orders for investigation by police was passed under Section 156 (3) Cr.P.C. by the Metropolitan Magistrates, Chennai, and Judicial Magistrates all over Tamil Nadu. The District Judges concerned are directed to fully co-operate with the Registrar (Vigilance) in securing such particulars. The Registrar (Vigilance) is directed to file the Report/statistics on or before 21.07.2008. 9. List these Petitions on 21.07.2008.