Thursday, 21, May, 2026
 
 
 
Expand O P Jindal Global University
 
  
  
 
 
 

Chandan Madan vs State Of Punjab And Another
2023 Latest Caselaw 19189 P&H

Citation : 2023 Latest Caselaw 19189 P&H
Judgement Date : 6 November, 2023

Punjab-Haryana High Court
Chandan Madan vs State Of Punjab And Another on 6 November, 2023
2023:PHHC:141059
140

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Cri. Misc. No. M-55376 of 2023

Chandan Madan
eens Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and another
eee Respondents
Crl. Misc. No. M-55551 of 2023
Chandan Madan
eens Petitioner
versus
State of Punjab and another
eee Respondents

Date of Decision: November 06, 2023
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE HARPREET SINGH BRAR

kK

Present:- Mr. Nupur Sood, Advocate
for the petitioner

Mr. Mohit Thakur, AAG Punjab

3K 2k 3k

Harpreet Singh Brar, J. (Oral)

1. Both the petitions are being decided by the common judgment as the issue involved in both these petitions is common. However, the facts are borrowed from CRM-55376-2023.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the petitioner is not named in the FIR and as per Annexure P-2 his role is only to the extent of visiting the customers residence as per the KYC details and verifying the addresses to the

best of his ability and his role was only at the initial stage when the loan was

REENA

2023.11.06 18:07

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/ judgment Chandigarh

2023:PHHC:141059

Crl. Misc. No. M-55551 of 2023

applied. Thereafter, he has absolutely no concern with regard to approval and disbursement of the loan amount. The petitioner as a Relationship Manager has not recommended the advancement of loan to any customer. The authenticity of the title deeds and revenue record as well as the site was duly verified by the Advocates on the panel of the Bank. As such the petitioner has been falsely implicated and for all intents and purposes the petitioner is not liable for any fraud or misappropriation committed with the Bank. Learned counsel for the petitioner further contends that the petitioner joined with the HDFC Bank as Relationship Manager in August 2013 and he has unblemished record. Learned counsel for the petitioner further relies upon order dated 27.08.2019 passed by this Court in CRM- M-35006-2019 in which one of the panel Advocate was granted interim relief and proceedings in FIR in question was ordered to be stayed qua the petitioner therein.

3. Per contra learned State counsel on instructions from HC Rajwinder Singh disputes the factual position and contends that after a detailed investigation challan has been presented on 08.01.2018 and the charges were framed on 13.06.2019. There are 20 PWs and 02 PWs have been already been examined and next date is 10.11.2023 and the role of the petitioner has surfaced during the investigation and, therefore, he has been rightly sent for trial in the final report presented under Section 173 Cr.P.C.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and by perusing the record of the case. The petitioner has also sought quashing of the impugned order dated 13.06.2019 (Annexure P-9) vide which the charges have been framed by the learned trial Court against the present petitioner under Section 420, 465, 467, 471,

201 and 120-B IPC.

REENA

2023.11.06 18:07

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/ judgment

Chandigarh

2023:PHHC:141059

Crl. Misc. No. M-55551 of 2023

5. This Court does not find any merit in the arguments raised by the learned counsel for the petitioner. This Court is unable to return a finding on the disputed facts raised in the present petition. The complicity of the petitioner, if at all, is made out or not would be a moot point to be decided by the trial Court on the basis of evidence adduced before it during the course of the trial. Moreover, the satisfaction which is required for framing of the charges is not based upon the adequacy and sufficiency of the matériel collected during the trial. As such there

is no infirmity in order dated 13.06.2019 vide which the charges were framed.

6. In view of the above, the petitions are devoid of any merit and are dismissed.

7. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of connected case. (HARPREET SINGH BRAR) JUDGE November 06, 2023

PECRA

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No Whether Reportable : Yes/No

REENA

2023.11.06 18:07

| attest to the accuracy and integrity of this order/ judgment

Chandigarh

 
Download the LatestLaws.com Mobile App
 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter
 

Publish Your Article

 

Campus Ambassador

 

Media Partner

 

Campus Buzz

 

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent

LatestLaws Guest Court Correspondent Apply Now!
 

LatestLaws.com presents: Lexidem Offline Internship Program, 2026

 

LatestLaws.com presents 'Lexidem Online Internship, 2026', Apply Now!

 
 

LatestLaws Partner Event : IJJ

 

LatestLaws Partner Event : MAIMS

 
 
Latestlaws Newsletter