Sandeep Kumar, J. – Heard learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner, learned APP for the State and learned counsel for the opposite party no.2.

2. The present application has been preferred under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short ‘Cr.P.C.’), by the petitioner assailing the order taking cognizance dated 18.03.2019 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Patna City, whereby the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code ( for short ‘I.P.C.’) in connection with Agamkuan P.S. Case No. 99 of 2017.

3. The case of the prosecution, in brief, relevant for the present application is that the informant - Deepak Kumar had made a written complaint before the officer-in-charge of the Agamkuan Police Station on 05.03.2017 stating therein that he has a joint property with his elder brother namely, Jai Shankar Singh situated at Anand Path, Kati Factory Road, Patna and that the elder brother of the informant had formed/incorporated a firm in the name of ‘Maa Vaishno Sales’ in which his elder brother had made his wife Sunita Devi (bhabhi of the informant) as the proprietor of the aforesaid firm. It was alleged by the informant that his brother and bhabhi had conspired with the present petitioner, who was the Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Kati Factory Road, Patna, to sanction a Cash Credit (for short ‘CC’) Loan (Business Loan) in favour of the firm to the tune of rupees One Crore and Thirty Lakhs, for which the joint property was mortgaged without the signature or the consent of the informant in flagrant misuse of her post.

3.1. It is further alleged that after the loan was sanctioned, the accused persons had distributed the amount amongst themselves. Upon learning about the sanction of the loan, the informant met with his brother and his wife on 05.02.2017 asking them to repay the loan however, they not only refused to repay the aforesaid loan but also stated that they are not concerned even if the mortgaged property is auctioned by the bank. Based on the written complaint of the informant, Agamkuan P.S. Case No.99 of 2017 was lodged against the accused persons including the present petitioner.

4. After investigation, the Police submitted charge-sheet against the accused persons including the present petitioner under sections 419, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B read with section 34 of the I.P.C. and thereafter vide the impugned order dated 18.03.2019 cognizance of the offences under aforesaid mentioned section was taken.

5. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is working at Punjab National Bank in the SMG Scale-IV and is presently posted at New Market Branch as Chief Manager. He further submits that the crux of the issue is that the co-accused Jay Shankar Singh and his wife Sunita Devi had formed/incorporated a firm in the name of ‘Maa Vaishno Sales’ and the aforesaid co-accused persons had filed an application before the Kati Factory Road branch of the Punjab Nationa Bank for grant of a C.C. loan in favour of the said firm on 30.01.2015 and the aforesaid file was placed before another staff of the bank namely, Usha Kumari, who was working as J.M.G.-II in the bank.

6. It is the submission of the learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner that once the Bank is in receipt of the application for grant of loan, the Loan Manager of the Bank upon scrutiny of the papers and after an interview with the loanee prepares the pre-sanction appraisal and thereafter makes a proposal to the Chief Manager of the Bank recommending grant of loan. The Chief Manager is normally the final sanctioning authority for approval or rejection of the loan application. The learned Senior Counsel enlists the supporting documents which are ordinarily accompanied with a loan application which include – audited balance sheets, Income Tax Returns, KYC documents, photographs, securi