HYDERABAD: Mere arguments between public and public servants cannot be termed obstructing official duties, said a city court, while hearing a case of an argument between a customer and the staff of a bank at Langar Houz in 2016.
In the initial days of demonetisation, the person had withdrawn money from his account, but when he tried to withdraw the amount for the second time on the same day, the bank staff refused the payment, leading to an argument between the customer, who is the accused in this case and the bank staff.
Following this, a case was registered against the individual for obstruction of duties and he was arrested.
However, six years later, the court recently dismissed the case, ruling in his favour.
The bank staff told the court that he had obstructed their duties and pushed tables in the branch. But the court pointed out that the staff failed to depose how the accused obstructed their duties.
“It cannot be said that merely pushing tables in the bank amounts to obstructing duties of a public servant,” the court observed.
The court pointed out that the staff, who lodged the complaint in 2016, identified the accused during the trial in 2019, which was after a lapse of three years.
“It is very unreasonable to believe that a person sees another person for the first time and remembers the same person after three years when there is no prior acquaintance with each other. This court is afraid to believe the evidence of the staff with regard to the identification of the accused,” the court said.
Speaking about the other bank employees, who were eyewitnesses to the case, the court said that they knew about the argument but nowhere in their evidence deposed that the accused had obstructed their duties.
