IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
Shri Rajiv Kumar Nigam – Appellant
Versus
State – Respondent
Bail Appln. 1926 of 2023
Decided On : 31-07-2023
Bail - Criminal Procedure - IPC 420/409/406/468/471/120B - Cr.P.C 439
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a branch manager of a bank, sought bail in a case involving allegations of sanctioning loans based on false documents, causing a loss of Rs.9.5 lakhs to the bank. The chargesheet was filed after a delay of five years, and the applicant was in judicial custody.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the accused had served the bank for a long time without any adverse record, and the investigation was complete with charges yet to be framed. Considering the circumstances, the court granted bail to the accused.
Issues: Delay in filing chargesheet, responsibility for loan scrutiny, pre-trial incarceration
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the delay in filing chargesheet, the accused's long service without adverse record, and the incomplete trial to grant bail.
Final Decision: The court granted regular bail to the accused on specified terms and conditions.
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J. The instant application under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (`Cr.P.C') has been filed on behalf of applicant seeking bail in case FIR bearing no. 56/2018, registered at Police Station EOW, South East, Delhi, for the offences punishable under Sections 420/409/406/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (`IPC').
2. Briefly stated, the present FIR was registered on 16.03.2018 on the basis of complaint filed by then branch head of Punjab National Bank, Jangpura, Bhogal, New Delhi who had alleged that one Mr. Harjeet Singh (co-accused) i.e. sole proprietor of M/s. GTB Enterprises had obtained a cash credit facility to the tune of Rs.9.5 lakhs from the complainant bank in the name of his firm, which was sanctioned under the scheme of 'Credit Guarantee Fund Trust for Micro and Small Enterprises'. It was stated that the said facility was secured by hypothecating raw materials such as iron rods, steel rods, finished goods etc. However, during the investigation, no such unit was found at the given address and the rent agreement given by co-accused Harjeet Singh was found to be fake. As per prosecution, it was discovered during the course of investigation, while examining the bank statements of M/s. GTB Enterprises, that the amount in question was withdrawn by the borrower and transferred to various accounts which were either the shell companies or individuals and the same were used to show fake business transactions. It is alleged that the applicant/accused, who was the then Manager of complainant Bank, was responsible for sanctioning the credit facility to co-accused and it was alleged that he had sanctioned the loan to a non-existing firm and he had failed to monitor routing of sales during post-sanction follow up. It is further the case of prosecution that the applicant/accused himself used to visit the concerned properties and carry out the valuation of the same before sanctioning loans, and he himself used to look after each and every document which was relevant for the purposes of sanctioning the loan. On these allegations, the present FIR was registered.
3. Learned counsel for the accused/applicant states that the applicant was working as branch manager of the complainant Bank at the time of alleged offence but the documents pertaining to the loans obtained by the customers had to be checked by other persons also before it reached him. It is argued that applicant has been falsely implicated in the present cases on the basis of statements of co-accused persons and the prosecution has also not shown any money trail qua the applicant. It is also stated that though the case pertains to the year 2018,the chargesheet was filed on 24.01.2023, and even the charges are yet to be framed as the State is seeking adjournment on each date on one ground or the other. It is stated that the accused is in judicial custody since 28.10.2022 and several other co-accused were not even arrested in the present case. It is further stated that applicant has been granted bail in other cases registered at same point of time on the basis of similar allegations. It is therefore prayed that bail be granted to him.
4. Learned ASC for the State, however, argues that the allegations against the accused are serious in nature and the applicant had misused his official position for which six other FIRs are also pending against him. It is stated that the loans sanctioned by the applicant had become Non-Performing Assets (NPA) and during investigation, it was found that the customers had tendered false and fabricated documents on the basis of which loans had been sanctioned by the applicant.
5. The arguments addressed by both sides have been heard and material on record has been perused.
6. After hearing arguments and going through the case file, this Court is of the opinion that the present accused/applicant was the branch manager of the complainant Bank and some of the loans/credit facilities granted by
The court considered the delay in filing chargesheet, the accused's long service without adverse record, and the incomplete trial to grant bail.
The main legal point established is that the court may grant bail to an accused if there is lack of evidence linking the accused to the alleged offence and if the charge sheet has been filed.
The judgment emphasizes the importance of balancing personal liberty with the security of the community and the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.
Grant of Bail - Jurisdiction to grant bail must be exercised on the basis of the well-settled principles having regard to the facts and circumstances of each case.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that an accused, who was not arrested during the investigation and for whom the investigating agency does not require custody, does not need to fil....
Bail in economic offences should be denied to protect the larger public and state interest and prevent tampering with witnesses.
Point of Law : “in economic offences, the accused is not entitled to anticipatory bail.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.