Prosecution under Section 482 CrPC was quashed where investigation disclosed no incriminating material against the accused manager.

The FIR, registered as C.R. No. I-15 of 2013, alleged that Tusharbhai Narottambhai Patel forged bank vouchers and other documents, represented them as genuine, and misappropriated amounts deposited by customers of Bharuch District Cooperative Bank Ltd.

The applicant, Alpeshbhai Patel, was alleged to have been the Bank Manager during the relevant period and to have misused his password, validated illegal transfers, and passed cheques and vouchers through which amounts were withdrawn from various accounts and transferred to other accounts.

The applicant sought quashing of the FIR, charge-sheet, and Sessions Case No. 1233 of 2015 under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

He relied on earlier orders of the High Court quashing the proceedings against similarly situated bank managers, Dipakkumar Pandya and Arjunsinh Sanglod.

The learned APP stated that no incriminating material had been found against the applicant, and the original complainant submitted that the misappropriated amount had been redeposited and that no material existed to justify prosecution of the applicant.

Whether the FIR, charge-sheet, and pending Sessions Case against the applicant should be quashed under Section 482 CrPC when the investigation disclosed no incriminating material connecting him with the alleged offences.

Whether the applicant was entitled to relief on the ground that similarly situated bank managers had previously obtained quashing of the same criminal proceedings.

The Court applied Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, which preserves the High Court’s inherent power to quash criminal proceedings where such intervention is necessary to prevent abuse of process or to secure the ends of justice.

The Court also considered the ingredients of the offences alleged under Sections 406, 409, 420, 463, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, particularly whether there was material linking the applicant to criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, use of forged documents, or disappearance of evidence.

The applicable principle was that criminal proceedings may be quashed where the investigation and charge-sheet disclose no sufficient or incriminating material against the accused.

The allegations against the applicant were principally based on his position as Bank Manager and his alleged use of banking credentials and approval of cheques and vouchers.

However, the Court noted that the investigation had not produced any incriminating material capable of establishing his involvement in the alleged offences; this position was also fairly conceded by the learned APP and accepted by the complainant’s advocate.

Since the evidentiary foundation necessary to proceed against the applicant was absent, continuation of the prosecution would not serve the ends of justice.

The Court further found support in its earlier decisions quashing the same FIR against similarly situated bank managers.

It quashed and set aside, qua the applicant, C.R. No. I-15 of 2013, the charge-sheet arising from it, Sessions Case No. 1233 of 2015 pending before the Sessions Court, Bharuch, and all consequential proceedings.

The Rule was made absolute and direct service was permitted.