Sri Ram vs The State Of Madhya Pradesh
2022 Latest Caselaw 5523 MP

                                                                        1
                                                 IN THE HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
                                                              AT JABALPUR
                                                               MCRC No. 13677 of 2021
                                                     (SRI RAM Vs THE STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH AND OTHERS)

                                   Dated : 18-04-2022
                                         Mr. Rajesh Maindiretta, learned counsel for the petitioner.

                                         Mr. C.M. Tiwari, learned Govt. Advocate for the State.
                                         Issue notice to the respondent No.2. Process fee be paid within four days

by both modes. Returnable within four weeks.

Heard on I.A. No.3922/2021, which is an application for stay of further proceedings in S.T. No.31/2018.

Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner, at the material point of time was posted as Branch Manager of the Canara Bank at Khadwa. An F.I.R. was registered disclosing a case of cheating by a person who masqueraded as the land owner and on the basis of fabricated documents, secured a K.C.C. loan from the Bank for Rs.3 Lacs.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner herein acted on the basis the said search report place before him by the Advocate, who is immune to from prosecution, in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Central Bureau of Investigation, Hyderabad Vs. K. Narayana Rao, (2012)

9SCC 512, which has recently been followed by another Two Judge Bench of the Supreme Court of the case of Surendra Nath Pandey and Another Vs. State of Bihar and Another, (2020) 18 SCC 730 , where, the cases were quashed against the lawyer who had given the search report. The argument of the learned counsel for the petitioner that if the Advocate who generated the search report, on the basis of which the loan was sanctioned by the petitioner herein, are not criminally liable then how can the petitioner herein,who acted upon the search report, be prosecuted for the same ?

Under the circumstances, further proceedings in S.T. No.31/2018 pending in the Court of Ist Addl. Sessions Judge, Khandwa, shall remain stayed till the next date of hearing. List this case on "Top of the List on 16.06.2022" for final hearing Signature Not Verified SAN at motion hearing stage.

C.C. as per rule Digitally signed by ASHISH DATTA Date: 2022.04.25 13:45:32 IST

(ATUL SREEDHARAN) JUDGE a

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ASHISH DATTA Date: 2022.04.25 13:45:32 IST