The court affirmed that denying bail constitutes pre-trial punishment and noted the necessity for evidence to substantiate allegations of fraud in loan acquisition.

JUDGMENT :

Virender Singh, J.

1. Apprehending his arrest, in Case FIR No.22 of 2024 dated 12^th July, 2024, (hereinafter referred to as the ‘FIR in question’), registered under Sections 420 , 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (hereinafterreferred to as ‘IPC’), with Police Station New Shimla, District Shimla, H.P., the applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as ‘ BNSS ’).

2. By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the I.O/police of Police Station New Shimla, to release him, on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-mentioned case/FIR.

3. According to the applicant, he is having deep roots in the society and FIR in question has falsely been registered against him by the police.

4. It is the case of the applicant that he had obtained KCC loan of Rs. 8,00,000/- in the year 2017, and had tendered his land papers correctly, but, there was some connivance between the bank officials and the guarantor, about which, the applicant was not having any knowledge.

5. According to the applicant, he is innocent and has falsely been implicated, in the present case.

6. Certain undertakings have been given on behalf of the applicant, for which, the applicant is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued to the police/I.O., in this case.

7. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report disclosing therein, that on 12^th July, 2024, a copy of order, passed under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the ‘CrPC’), was received from the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. III, Shimla, alongwith the complaint, moved by Virender Kumar Chauhan, who is the Manager of Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank, Khalini, Shimla.

8. In the said complaint, the following facts have been mentioned:

“1. That the complainant Bank is a Body Corporate Constituted under Banking Companies (Acquisition and Transfer of undertaking) Act No. 5, 1970 having its Head Office at Jail Road District Mandi, Himachal Pradesh and amongst other Branch Offices, a Branch at Khalini, District Shimla in the State of Himachal Pradesh.

2. That Virender Kumar Chauhan of the complainant Bank who has signed this complaint is the Principal Officer/Branch Manager/Assistant General Manager of the Bank. He is constituted Attorney of the Complainant Bank and as such is competent to sign the proceedings, affidavit, Vakalatnama to engage advocate and is empowered to institute the complaint and as such the present complaint is instituted by Sh. Virender Kumar Chauhan who is presently posted as Regional Manager District Hamirpur (HP) and the present complaint instituted on the basis of information derived from the records of the plaintiff Bank. A copy of the Power of Attorney is filed herewith.

3. That the respondent No. 1 approached to the complainant Bank on dated 20.03.2017 and requested the complainant Bank to grant a KCC loan of Rs 8,00,000/- for agriculture produce and the respondent has also submitted his loan application along with revenue papers (Jamabandi). On perusal of the loan application, the complainant bank has agreed to grant a KCC Limit under agricultural loan scheme of the complainant bank and as per the KCC loan Scheme of the Bank, the complainant bank has pre- sanctioned KCC Limit and the respondent was further requested to create charge under Schedule I of HP Agricultural Credit Operation and Miscellaneous Pro