Back
2022 Supreme(All) 954
IN THE HIGH COURT OF ALLAHABAD
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
Ravi Shankar Pandey – Appellant
Versus
State through CBI/EDI, New Delhi and Others – Respondents
Criminal Misc. Anticipatory Bail Application U/s 438 Cr.P.C. No. 13956 of 2021
Decided On : 19-09-2022
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellants : Ashok Kumar Mishra Baled, Vimal Kumar.
For the Respondent: Anurag Kumar Singh.
The main legal point established in the judgment is the importance of co-operation with the investigation, the discretion of the trial court in issuing arrest orders, and the protection of individual liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Forgery and Fraud - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471 - Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Section 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d) - [120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 13(2) r/w 13(1)(c) and (d)] - The court discussed the legal provisions related to anticipatory bail and the conditions to be imposed for granting the same. It highlighted the importance of co-operation with the investigation and the discretion of the trial court in issuing arrest orders, citing relevant judgments and emphasizing the protection of individual liberty under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, Ravi Shankar Pandey, sought anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in a case involving forgery and fraud related to Kisan Credit Cards. He argued that he was falsely implicated and had co-operated with the investigation, while the C.B.I. contended that the fraud was committed with the collusion of bank officers.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant had co-operated with the investigation and had not been named in the initial F.I.R. It emphasized the importance of protecting individual liberty and highlighted relevant judgments regarding the discretion of the trial court in issuing arrest orders.
Issues: The issues revolved around the applicant's alleged involvement in the forgery and fraud related to Kisan Credit Cards, the co-operation with the investigation, and the discretion of the trial court in issuing arrest orders.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the applicant's co-operation with the investigation, the absence of his name in the initial F.I.R., and the legal principles regarding the discretion of the trial court in issuing arrest orders, as highlighted in relevant judgments.
Final Decision: The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant, Ravi Shankar Pandey, with specific conditions to protect the integrity of the trial proceedings and prevent any tampering with evidence or witness intimidation.
JUDGMENT :
RAJESH SINGH CHAUHAN, J.
1. Heard Sri Ashok Kumar Mishra, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the opposite parties-C.B.I.
2. This anticipatory bail application has been preferred by the applicant (Ravi Shankar Pandey) apprehending his arrest in R.C. No. 2(A)/2020 (R.C. No. 0062020A0002/2020), C.C. No. 310/2021, C.B.I. vs. Prakash Chandra Vidhyarthi and Others, under Sections 120-B, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C. and Section 13 (2) R/W 13 (1) (C) and (D) of P.C. Act, 1988.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that the present applicant has been falsely implicated in the aforementioned case as he has not committed any offence as alleged in the prosecution story so narrated in the First Information Report (in short F.I.R.).
4. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant was not named in the F.I.R. dated 09.01.2020 (Annexure No. 1) and he has not committed any offence. The present applicant is serving on the post of Senior Customer Assistant (Level-II), State Bank of India, A.P. Sen Road Branch, Lucknow. The issue is relating to forgery and fraud from the year 2014 to 2017 in respect of Kisan Credit Cards. During investigation it has been found that some fake borrowers have been given benefit of Kisan Credit Card and the documents of those borrowers were found to be forged. The sanctioning authority of the said loan was one Sri K.K. Srivastava, Manager of the Branch whereas the duty attributed to the present applicant was to feed the data.
5. The attention has been drawn towards the appraisal/assessment of such loan which has been annexed with the supplementary affidavit wherein the signatures of the Manager Sri K.K. Srivastava as well as the present applicant have been shown.
6. Learned counsel for the applicant has submitted that during investigation the present applicant has co-operated with the Investigating Authority and has followed the process of law. He always appeared before the Investigating Officer as and when he was called and submitted his explanation in respect of his bona-fide. He has submitted that the applicant was not the sanctioning authority and he was not having any ulterior motive inasmuch as nothing incriminating has been recovered from possession of the present applicant.
7. The charge-sheet has been filed against the present applicant as well as the then Manager Sri K.K. Srivastava. Besides, as per learned counsel for the applicant, the investigation is going on against Sri Anshul Mehdi Ratta and Sri Awadhesh Kumar Srivastava the then Managers of the State Bank of India and some unknown persons.
8. Learned counsel for the applicant has further submitted that the present applicant is an employee within the category of Level-II. The C.B.I. has never issued any coercive steps against him since lodging of the F.I.R. on 09.01.2020 for the reason that he has co-operated in the investigation. Now, the charge-sheet has been filed.
9. Since he is an employee of State Bank of India, therefore, there is no likelihood of his absconding and he shall further cooperate with the proceedings. He has further submitted that any reasonable condition may be imposed against him but his liberty may be protected till conclusion of the proceedings.
10. Per contra, Sri Anurag Kumar Singh, learned counsel for the C.B.I. has submitted that this is the case wherein the fraud and forgery has been committed by some fake persons with the collusion of some Bank Officers/Officials. The investigation against the present applicant and the then Manager Sri K.K. Srivastava (since retired) has been completed and charge-sheet has been filed but against some other officers of the Bank it is still going on.
11. Sri Singh has however submitted that the present applicant has co-operated with the investigation, therefore, he has not been arrested till filing of the charge-sheet but he is duty bound to appear before the learned trial court to face the
