Joy Guru Agency Represented By Its Proprietor Achintya Saha v. Union Of India And ORS.
22.07.2025 (pp) In The High Court At Calcutta Constitutional Writ Jurisdiction Appellate Side W.P.A 6280 of 2025 Joy Guru Agency -versus- Union of India & Ors.
Mr. Soumyadeep Das ...For the Petitioner.
Mr. Anuran Samanta ...For Union of India.
Mr. Dipanjan Datta, Mr. Subhajit Chowdhury ....for Bank of Baroda.
Mr. Victor Dutta ....for the Union Bank of India.
1.
The petitioner alleges that the cheque which was issued in his favour and was supposedly deposited in the drop box of the Bank of Baroda for clearance has been credited in favour of a third party. The petitioner prays for a direction upon the bank to release the amount mentioned in the cheque to him.
2.
Learned counsel representing Bank of Baroda submits, upon instructions that, an FIR was lodged and a criminal case has been registered on the complaint filed by the petitioner. Investigation is pending. The police have collected the CCTV footages from the bank's premises.
3.
There was a request from the drawer of the cheque for stopping payment in respect of the subject cheque, but prior to receiving the request, the money got transferred.
4.
Learned counsel representing the Bank of Baroda denies the allegations made by the petitioner against the bank.
5.
Learned counsel representing the Union Bank of India also denies the allegations made against the bank.
6.
Be that as it may, as it has been brought to the notice of the Court that the police are investigating the matter, accordingly, the instant writ petition is disposed of by observing that it will be open for the petitioner to approach the competent authority for relief, if so advised. The petitioner may also approach the Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum in case the petitioner alleges deficiency of service at the instant of the bank.
7.
The writ petition stands disposed of.
8.
Urgent Photostat certified copy of this order be supplied to the parties, if applied for, as early as possible.
( Amrita Sinha, J.)