Bano Devi And ANR. v. National Commission For Scheduled Castes

$~36 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ W.P.(C) 3481/2018 BANO DEVI AND ANR.

..... Petitioners Through:

Mr Dinesh Singh Rawat and Mr Anilendra, Advocates.

versus NATIONAL COMMISSION FOR SCHEDULED CASTES ..... Respondent Through:

Mr Rajiv Kapur, Ms Khushboo Kapur and Mr Sourjya Das, Advocates for SBI.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 02.05.2019 1.

The petitioners have filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that directions be given to respondent no. 1 (NCSC) to take appropriate action on the complaint filed by the petitioners. 2.

The petitioners have filed the complaint alleging discrimination against their son, Shri Nishan Lal, who was working in the State Bank of Jaipur and Bikaner (now merged with the State Bank of India Ltd.). 3.

It appears from the complaint made by the petitioners that an FIR under Section 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 read with provisions of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 has been filed against the petitioner's son, in respect of loans advanced by the said bank to certain borrowers.

It is also alleged in the complaint that the loans had been

provided to the borrowers at the instance of higher authorities. Plainly, this is not a subject matter that is required to be examined by the NCSC. The controversy relates to a criminal case, which is required to be tried by a court of competent jurisdiction. The defence whether the petitioners' son was involved in any criminal acts is available to the petitioners' son in the said proceedings.

4.

In view of the above, this petition is unmerited and is, accordingly, dismissed VIBHU BAKHRU, J MAY 02, 2019 MK