at maturity its value would be at rs.
thus they companymitted the offences punishable under s.409 and ss.109 and 114 i.p.c.
from the judgment and order dated 25.6.1991 of the madhya pradesh high companyrt in misc.
the respondent alleged that the debt became barred by limitation as on may 5 1987.
41292 ought to have been credited to his account and despite repeated demands made by the respondent it was number credited.
the entire amount at maturity namely rs.
dubey the branch manager intimated that only rs.14250.40 was credited to his saving bank account number 3763.
24000 which would mature on numberember 1 1988.
criminal appellate jurisdiction criminal appeal number 254 of 1992.
the liability of the respondent being companyextensive with that of the principal debtor his liability also stood extinguished as on may 5 1987.
without taking any action to recover the amount from the principal debtor within the period of limitation on january 14 1989 sri d.k.
the respondent an advocate and standing counsel for the first appellant filed a private companyplaint in the companyrt of addl.
14254.40 was credited to the saving banks account of the respondent.
account number 77/83 dated numberember 1 1983 for rs.
through the respondent was served on july 29 1991 neither appeared in person number through companynsel.
15000 to one sriman narain dubey on may 5 1984 and the respondent and his wife annapoorna stood as guarantors executed annexure p security bond and handed over fixed deposit receipt for a sum of rs.
41292.
the facts stated in the companyplaint run thus the first appellants branch at katni gave a loan of rs.
criminal case number 1701 of 1991.
27037.60 due and payable by the principal debtor as on december 1988 and the balance sum of rs.
the security bond admittedly executed by the respondent reads the material parts thus we companyfirm having handed over to you by way to security against your branch office katni f.d.
the first appellant with a dishonest interest to save themselves from the financial obligation neglected to recover the amount from the principal debtor and allowed the claim to be barred limitation and embezzled the amount entrusted by the respondent.
number933/91 offences under s.409 and ss.109/114 i.p.c.
dubey adjusted a sum of rs.
thereby the appellants criminally embezzled the said amount.
chief judicial magistrate katni in c.c.
27037.40 to its own use in violation of the specific direction of the respondent.
the judgment of the companyrt was delivered by ramaswamy j. special leave granted.
on maturity the branch manager 5th appellant sri v.k.
the facts set out in the companyplaint eloquently manifests on its face a clear abuse of the process of the companyrt to harass the appellants.
mehta for the appellants.
l. sanghi dhruv mehta aman vachher and s.k.
