Cognizance Is of the Offence, Not the Offender: Madras High Court Rejects Challenge to ED’s Supplementary Complaint in PMLA Case Acquittal in Rajasthan No Bar to Trial in Madhya Pradesh: MP High Court Rejects Double Jeopardy Plea in Antiquities Theft Case 20% Deposit Isn’t Automatic in Cheque Bounce Appeals: Right to Appeal Can’t Be Priced Out: Punjab & Haryana High Court Checks Mechanical Use of Section 148 NI Act A Child Is Not a Non-Earner: Punjab & Haryana High Court Sets New Benchmark in Compensation for Minors’ Deaths 90 Days Is Not Sacrosanct – Courts Can Permit Reply to Counter-Claim Even Beyond Prescribed Time in Interest of Justice: Punjab & Haryana High Court Magistrate Can Proceed Only for Offences Committed in India Until Sanction Is Obtained for Acts Outside India: Orissa High Court on International Financial Fraud Award Is Vitiated by Non-Consideration of Material Evidence: Orissa High Court Sets Aside Industrial Tribunal’s Wage Award in IMFA Case POCSO | Absence of Child's Name in Birth Certificate Not Fatal: Kerala High Court No One Has the Right to Impute Illicit Motives to Judges in the Name of Free Speech: Karnataka High Court Jails Man for Criminal Contempt DV Complaint Cannot Be Quashed at Threshold Under Article 227: Madras High Court Refuses to Interfere, Directs Accused to Seek Remedy Before Magistrate Recovery Wasn't From Accused's Exclusive Knowledge — Cylinder Already Marked in Site Plan Before Arrest: Allahabad High Court Acquits Man in Murder Case Setting Fire to House Where Only Minors Were Present is a Heinous Offence – No Quashing Merely Because Parties Settled: Calcutta High Court No Exclusive Possession Means Licence, Not Lease: Calcutta High Court Rules City Civil Court Has Jurisdiction to Evict Licensees Defendant's Own Family Attested the Sale Agreement – Yet She Called It Nominal: Andhra Pradesh High Court Upholds Specific Performance Renewal Not Automatic, No Evidence Of Notice Or Mutual Agreement: AP High Court Dismisses Indian Oil’s Appeal Against Eviction When Death Is Caused by an Unforeseeable Forest Fire, Criminal Prosecution Cannot Be Sustained Without Proof of Rashness, Negligence, or Knowledge: Supreme Court Proof of Accident Alone is Not Enough – Claimants Must Prove Involvement of Offending Vehicle Under Section 166 MV Act: Supreme Court Dismisses Appeal for Compensation in Fatal Road Accident Case Income Tax | Search Means Search, Not ‘Other Person’: Section 153C Collapses When the Assessee Himself Is Searched: Karnataka High Court Draws a Clear Red Line License Fee on Hoardings is Regulatory, Not Tax; GST Does Not Bar Municipal Levy: Bombay High Court Filing Forged Bank Statement to Mislead Court in Maintenance Case Is Prima Facie Offence Under Section 466 IPC: Allahabad High Court Upholds Summoning Continued Cruelty and Concealment of Infertility Justify Divorce: Chhattisgarh High Court Upholds Divorce Disguising Punishment as Simplicity Is Abuse of Power: Delhi High Court Quashes Dismissals of Civil Defence Volunteers for Being Stigmatic, Not Simpliciter Readiness and Willingness Under Section 16(c) Is Not a Ritualistic Phrase — Plaintiff Must Prove It With Substance, Not Just Words: Karnataka High Court FIR in Disproportionate Assets Case Quashed: Patna High Court Slams SP for 'Non-Application of Mind' and 'Absence of Credible Source Information' Ownership of Vehicle Linked to Commercial Quantity of Heroin – Custodial Interrogation Necessary: Punjab & Haryana High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail under Section 482 BNSS Death Caused by Rash Driving Is Not a Private Dispute — No FIR Quashing on Basis of Compromise in Section 106 BNS Cases: Punjab & Haryana High Court No Bank Can Override Court Orders: Rajasthan High Court Slams Axis Bank for Unauthorized Withdrawal from Court-Ordered FD"

Integrity is Paramount in Banking Sector: Gujarat High Court Upholds Bank Employee’s Discharge Over Misappropriation

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


Court affirms dismissal in a decades-old case, emphasizing the importance of trust and integrity in financial institutions.

The Gujarat High Court has upheld the discharge of a bank employee involved in a misappropriation case dating back to 1986. The bench, comprising Chief Justice Mrs. Justice Sunita Agarwal and Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee, dismissed the appeals by the delinquent employee while allowing the bank's appeals, reinforcing the gravity of integrity within the banking sector.

The case pertains to Rashmikant Girdharlal Dave, a Head Cashier at the State Bank of Saurashtra's Agricultural Development Branch in Amreli. In November 1986, a misappropriation of ₹35,000 was detected during a cash verification. Dave was subsequently suspended, and after a departmental inquiry, he was discharged from service in August 1991. Despite multiple legal battles over the years, the final judgment came on May 17, 2024.

The court emphasized the critical nature of integrity and trust in the banking profession. Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee noted, “The act on the part of the delinquent employee was dishonesty. When a person is found guilty of misappropriating public money, especially a bank employee, it is natural that the bank would lose confidence or faith in such a person.”

The court supported the disciplinary authority’s decision, stressing that the punishment of discharge was appropriate given the misconduct. “No indulgence should be granted to a bank employee where charges of misconduct like cheating, fraud, and misappropriation of public money have been proved,” the bench stated.

The court discussed Section 11A of the Industrial Disputes Act, 1947, which allows tribunals to re-appreciate evidence and modify punishment if deemed disproportionate. However, it was concluded that the Tribunal had overstepped by substituting the discharge penalty with a lesser punishment, considering the proven misappropriation.

Citing previous judgments, the court reiterated that once misconduct involving financial irregularity is proven, especially in the banking sector, strict penalties are justified. The bench highlighted that leniency in such cases could undermine public trust in financial institutions.

Justice Aniruddha P. Mayee remarked, “The temporary misappropriation of ₹35,000 has been proved against the delinquent employee. The punishment imposed by the disciplinary authority is based on loss of confidence, a primary factor to be taken into account.”

The Gujarat High Court’s judgment underscores the judiciary’s commitment to maintaining integrity within the banking sector. By upholding the discharge, the court sends a clear message about the seriousness of financial misconduct. This landmark decision is expected to reinforce the legal framework ensuring strict adherence to ethical standards in financial institutions.

 

Date of Decision: May 17, 2024

Rashmikant Girdharlal Dave vs. Chairman, State Bank of India & Ors.

Latest Legal News