Allahabad HC Quashes Criminal Complaint Against Union Bank; Emphasizes Magistrate's Duty to Apply His Judicial Mind While Entertaining Complaints

The Allahabad High Court has quashed a criminal complaint case against the Union Bank of India, while observing that the magistrate is required to apply his mind as to whether sufficient ground for proceeding exists in the case or not.

The Court reiterated that the summoning of an accused in a criminal case is a serious matter and the order of issuance of process is not an empty formality. 

In that context, the Bench of Justice Shamim Ahmed observed that, "in the present case learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lucknow has failed to apply his judicial mind to the facts of the case and the law applicable thereto while entertaining the same, the Chief Judicial Magistrate has not examined the nature of allegations made in the complaint and the evidences both oral and documentary in support thereof."

The Union Bank of India, through its Chief Manager, had filed an application under Section 482 of the Criminal Procedure Code (Cr.P.C.) to quash a Criminal Complaint Case which had been filed by the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), Lucknow, under Section 24 of the Contract Labour (Regulation and Abolition) Act, 1970.

The Court noted that, "the learned Magistrate, while entertaining the criminal complaint, has not applied its judicial mind and has simply passed a one-word order 'Register' on 3.11.2012; no order for taking cognizance and issuance of summons has been passed by the learned Magistrate to the best of knowledge of the applicant; the allegation of offences, alleged to be committed by the petitioner, has no legal basis since the wooden/electrical interior work being run by service providers is not a contract of service, but contract for service, and as such the Act is inapplicable in the present case; in reply to the show cause notice the necessary registers and forms were sent to the Labour Enforcement Officer (Central), although the same related to premises at Vibhuti Khand, Gomti Nagar, Lucknow, but the Labour Enforcement Officer failed to consider them and filed the impugned complaint; the applicant cannot be termed as 'Principal Employer' as the bank was not directly responsible for the supervision and control and the banking company is not the establishment, which is required to be registered under Section 7 of the Act, and, the criminal complaint has been filed against the Chief Manager of the Union Bank of India not by his designation, but in his individual capacity, without making the Bank as an accused with a malafide intention to harass and humiliate him."

The Court also placed reliance on a catena of cases, including Mehmood UL Rehman v. Khazir Mohammad Tunda and Others, wherein it was said that since it is a process of taking judicial notice of certain facts which constitute an offence, there has to be application of mind as to whether the allegations in the complaint, when considered along with the statements recorded or the inquiry conducted thereon, would constitute a violation of the law so as to call a person to appear before the criminal court.

Cause Title: Union Bank of India vs State of UP & Anr.

Click here to read/download the Judgment