- 1 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 21ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 65 OF 2025 BETWEEN: MR. ANIL KUMAR LOBO S/O MINGAL LOBO, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, CHAIRMAN, MCC BANK LTD., HAMPANKATTA, MANGALORE - 575 001. …PETITIONER (BY SRI. D.R. RAVISHANKAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. ABHISHEK MARLA M.J, ADVOCATE) AND: 1. STATE OF KARNATAKA BY POLICE INSPECTOR, MANGALORE RURAL POLICE STATION, MANGALURU, D K, REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA, BANGALORE - 560 001. 2. JEEVAN PEREIRA S/O LATE JULIYAN PEREIRA, AGED ABOUT 43 YEARS, R/AT NO.4-134/5, LUCIANA HOUSE CUTINHO, PADAVU, NEAR PERMAI CHURCH, Digitally signed by SHARADAVANI B Location: High Court of Karnataka - 2 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 ULAIBETTU VILLAGE, MANGALORE CITY, KARNATAKA - 574 145. …RESPONDENTS (BY SRI. M.R. PATIL, HCGP FOR R1; SRI. SHYAM SUNDAR, SR. COUNSEL A/W SRI. MOHAMMED AYUB ALI, ADVOCATE FOR R2) THIS CRL.P IS FILED U/S 482 OF CR.PC (FILED U/S 528 BNSS) PRAYING TO QUASH THE FIR REGISTERED AGAINST THE PETITIONER (ACCUSED) REGISTERED BY MANGALORE RURAL P.S. IN CR.NO.113/2024 FOR THE OFFENCE P/U/S 108 OF BNS 2023 VIDE ANNEXURE-A PENDING ON THE FILE OF 3RD J.M.F.C COURT MANGALURU D.K. THIS PETITION, COMING ON FOR ADMISSION, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER: CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM ORAL ORDER The present petition is filed by the accused, who is also the Chairman of MCC Bank Limited, wherein the deceased, along with his brother, Malcolm Pereira, had availed a loan. The petitioner seeks quashing of the proceedings in Crime No.113/2024 registered for the - 3 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, as per Annexure–A. 2. The substance of the complaint is that the deceased, Manohar Pereira, along with his brother, Malcolm Pereira, had jointly borrowed a loan from MCC Bank. It is alleged in the complaint that the present petitioner, in his capacity as Chairman of the said bank, subjected the deceased to harassment and further diverted the EMIs paid by him by misusing his position. According to respondent No.2/defacto complainant, the petitioner is directly responsible for such acts of misappropriation and harassment, which drove the deceased to commit suicide by hanging at his residence. It is further alleged that the deceased, being unable to withstand the harassment, took the extreme step, leading to the lodging of the present complaint and consequent registration of Crime No.113/2024. The - 4 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 petitioner, however, seeks quashing of the proceedings on the ground that, even if the allegations are accepted in their entirety, they do not constitute any offence against him. 3. I have heard the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as the learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent No.2/complainant. The records have been carefully perused. 4. This Court has also bestowed its anxious consideration to the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra & Others, Crl.A. Nos.2177–2185/2024. Before proceeding further, this Court deems it appropriate to refer to the letter dated 22.07.2024 addressed by the deceased, Manohar Pereira, and his brother, Malcolm Pereira, to the Branch Manager, which - 5 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 is placed on record as Annexure–C. The contents of the said letter are extracted hereinbelow: "The branch Manager MCC Bank Hampankatta Branch Mangalore Sub: Application for Settlement of Loans Ref: Loan No. HLT 20130008 MLT 20170022 Respected Sir/Medam, Regarding to the subject cited above we would like to inform you that the above said loans and the subsequent proceedings of action if the said property belangs to us now we have decided to arrange us payment and to the loan on settlement basis. Kindly initiate the settlement proceeding related to the above said loan and we are ready to settle the dues accordingly. The regard document will be submitted Thanking you Your faithfully (Manohar Pereira) (Malcolm Pereira)" 5. This Court equally feels it relevant to extract the second letter dated 23.07.2024 addressed to the Branch - 6 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 Manager by the brother of the deceased, namely, Malcolm Pereira, as per Annexure-D, which reads as under: "FROM Malcolm Pereira 4-134 Luciana Near Permai Church Ulaibettu village, Mangalore taluk TO The branch Manager MCC Bank Fomders Branch Mangalore Sub: Payment of part amount and handover of keeps of Door No.4-134/5 situated at Fermai, Ullabettu village. S.No.9-2(P) Loan A/c No.HLT 20130008 MLT 20170022 Respected Sir/Medam, Regarding to the subject cited above on 22/07/2024 we have paid part amount Rs.5,32,800/- the settlement of above referred loan. I have takenover the keys of the house bearing door No.4-134/5 at Ullabettu village S.No.9-2(P) on behalf of my brother Manohar Pereira who is unwell and not in a position to receive the keys personally. Kindly handover the keys to me. Thank you for your co-operation in the matter. Thanking you Your faithfully (Malcolm Pereira)" - 7 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 6. On a closer scrutiny of the letters placed on record, particularly Annexures–C and D, it becomes evident that the deceased, Manohar Pereira, along with his brother, Malcolm Pereira, had jointly availed a loan from MCC Bank. The records reveal that the bank, having invoked its rights under the provisions of the SARFAESI Act, 2002, had taken possession of the secured property. Subsequently, acting on the specific request made by the deceased and his brother, the bank was considerate enough to restore possession of the property upon receiving a sum of Rs.5,32,800/–. Annexure–D is of decisive significance in the present case, as it records that the said sum was accepted towards settlement of the outstanding dues, the keys were handed over to the borrowers, and it was noted therein that Manohar Pereira was not in a position to personally receive the keys on account of ill–health. The recital in the said letter also clarifies that the payment was part settlement. The tenor of these letters unequivocally demonstrates that the transaction was essentially a settlement of loan dues under the statutory - 8 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 scheme of the SARFAESI Act and not an instance of harassment by the petitioner. 7. Having examined these crucial documents, this Court is constrained to observe that it is unfortunate that respondent No.2 – the defacto complainant, who is admittedly not a party to the loan transaction has sought to exploit the untimely death of his brother, Manohar Pereira, by giving it a criminal colour. The contemporaneous letters written by the deceased and his brother Malcolm Pereira do not disclose any allegation of harassment at the hands of the petitioner or the bank. On the contrary, the letters reveal that both borrowers were in active negotiations with the bank and had sought leniency in the matter of repayment. The bank, despite being entitled to proceed against the secured assets under the SARFAESI Act, extended a concession and restored possession. The very fact that possession had been taken under the SARFAESI Act itself indicates that the loan account was classified as a Non–Performing Asset (NPA), and the bank was exercising its statutory right. Thus, the - 9 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 subsequent registration of a criminal case, on the premise of harassment, appears to be an afterthought, triggered only by the unfortunate death of one of the borrowers. 8. It is now well–settled by a catena of judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court as well as this Court that the mere fact of a person committing suicide, without there being any proximate act of instigation, abetment or wilful conduct on the part of the accused, cannot bring the case within the fold of the offence punishable under Section 108 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 (corresponding to Section 306 of IPC). The law mandates that before registering such offences, the Investigating Agency must ascertain whether there exists material to indicate that the suicide was the direct consequence of an act or omission attributable to the accused. Unless it is demonstrated that the accused had intentionally instigated, provoked or facilitated the commission of suicide, the basic ingredients of Section 108, BNS are not attracted. In Abhinav Mohan Delkar v. State of Maharashtra & Others (Crl.A. Nos.2177–2185/2024), - 10 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 the Hon’ble Apex Court has once again reiterated that despite authoritative pronouncements, investigating authorities often fail to appreciate the fine distinction between a civil dispute or personal hardship and the penal offence of abetment of suicide. 9. A careful evaluation of the complaint averments, read with the documentary evidence produced by the petitioner, leaves no manner of doubt that what is essentially a loan transaction is now sought to be converted into a criminal prosecution. The attempt of respondent No.2 to rope in the petitioner, who was functioning as Chairman of MCC Bank, is nothing but an abuse of the process of law. This Court also notes with concern that the petitioner, a person holding a responsible and respectable position, was subjected to arrest and incarceration for three days on such untenable allegations. His liberty, dignity and reputation have suffered unwarranted injury. The material on record clearly shows that all negotiations were directly between the borrowers and the bank’s branch officials. The petitioner, by virtue of being - 11 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 the Chairman, had no role in the day–to–day operational aspects of the settlement. Even on this ground, continuation of proceedings against him cannot be sustained. If allowed to proceed, the prosecution would only result in further harassment, constitute a gross abuse of process and perpetuate injustice. This is therefore a fit case where the inherent powers of this Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deserve to be invoked to secure the ends of justice. 10. For the reasons aforesaid, this Court proceeds to pass the following: ORDER i. The criminal petition is hereby allowed; ii. The further investigation pending in Crime No.113/2024 registered by Mangalore Rural Police station and pending on the file of 3rd JMFC Court, Mangaluru D.K, is hereby quashed and set aside; - 12 - HC-KAR NC: 2025:KHC:32694 CRL.P No. 65 of 2025 iii. Any pending interlocutory applications, stand disposed of accordingly. Sd/- (SACHIN SHANKAR MAGADUM) JUDGE HDK List No.: 1 Sl No.: 14 CT: BHK