Dear friends, thank you for your interest in the query, and for your replies.
@ Sachin - Police investigation is on, or being initiated. But on what ground could the cashier be arrested? As I already mentioned, the requirement of encashing the cheqeu - i.e. signatures of both the signatories, were present, not only on the face of the cheque, but also on the back of it. So, the cashier is legally correct in honouring the cheque and tendering the cash against its encashment. There is no doubt that the bank officials are also involved in the scam, which is to the tune of over Rs.50 cr (although withdrawn by a series of transactions). However, precisely to your concern about arresting the cashier, I cant see any grounds for the same. Could you elaborate on other grounds?
@ Sathya Prakash / T.K.Sujith - There was no requirement that the account be operated by any authorisation letter. Joint signatures on the cheque was sufficient. I agree that any cheque, duly signed by both signatories, may be encashed without the physical presence of the signatories, but this is not the issue at hand. Further, as I mentioned that the cheque bore the signatures of both the signatories on the back of the cheque (see my reply to Sachin above), how can it be proved that the 1st signatory and not the 2nd, or vice-versa, has taken the cash from the counter? Further, is it mandatory for the bank to keep an account of the person encashing a self-cheque? If yes, then can you tell me the legal sanction for the same? If not, then why shall the bank be responsible to identify the person who took the cash from the counter?
@ Mohandas - Is there any legal restriction that no self-cheque can be drawn on a government acount? Could you please cite any RBI or Banking notification/guideline/regulation or case law?
Thanks all for taking part in this discussion.