Research › Search › Judgment

Bombay High Court · body

2013 DIGILAW 2460 (BOM)

Sham s/o. Kalidas Sharma v. State of Maharashtra

2013-12-02

A.B.CHAUDHARI, Z.A.HAQ

body2013
JUDGMENT A. B. CHAUDHARI, J.:- Rule. Rule made returnable forthwith. Heard finally by consent of the rival parties. 2. The applicants are seven persons, who are admittedly guarantors to the loan that was borrowed by the borrower. The borrower is not before this Court claiming any relief but the guarantors are the only persons claiming relief for quashing of the charge-sheet. 3. During the course of investigation of the F.I.R. that was registered against the applicants and the borrower, the police filed charge-sheet in the Court. In the meanwhile, the applicants-guarantors got paid the entire amount with interest to the Khamgaon Urban Co-operative Bank by pursuing borrower. 4. Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel for the Khamgaon Urban Cooperative Bank Limited agrees that the bank has received the entire amount with interest and has even issued "No due certificate" in respect of the loan that was borrowed by the borrower and in respect of which charge-sheet is filed in the Court. 5. We have perused the letter dated 17.10.2011 issued by the bank to the Police Inspector and another letter issued by the Police Inspector to the bank dated 28.07.2011. Perusal of those letters clearly show that the entire payment of the bank has been made over with interest and other charges and nothing remains to be recovered from the borrower or the guarantors. Mr. Deshpande, learned counsel for the bank had made statement on 4th March, 2013 before this Court that the settlement was arrived at between the parties. The said statement was recorded. That being so, we are of the opinion that the complainant-bank now cannot be allowed to turn around, since it has received entire due amount from the borrower and guarantors. 6. As stated earlier, the borrower has not come before this Court for quashing of the charge-sheet but the guarantors are before this Court for the said purpose. In view of the fact that the entire amount has been paid to the bank and looking to the nature of transaction, namely giving guarantee and standing as guarantors, we are of the opinion that there is no further need to prosecute the guarantors in criminal offence for which they have been prosecuted. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. The law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Gian Singh Vs. State of Punjab and another reported in ( 2012 (10) SCC 303 ): [2013 ALL SCR 1711 will apply in this case. The applicants do not have past criminal record. In the result, we pass the following order:- Criminal Application (APL) No.683/2012 is allowed. Rule is made absolute in terms of prayer clause (i) in respect of the applicants before us. There shall be no orders as to costs. Application allowed.