IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL
Alok Kumar Verma, J.
Santosh Kumar Sharma - Appellant
Versus
Central Bureau Of Investigation - Respondent
First Bail Application No. 293 of 2020
Decided On : 12-01-2021
Constitution of India, 1950, Art. 21 – Personal liberty of the individual – Very precious fundamental right – It should be curtailed only when it becomes imperative according to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. (Paras 6 to 10)
Hkkjrh; lafo/kku] 1950] vuqPNsn 21 & O;fDrxr Lora=rk & cgqewY; ekSfyd vfèkdkj & fdlh O;fDr dh O;fDrxr Lora=rk ij rHkh jksd yxkuh pkfg, tc ;g okn dh foy{k.k ifjfLFkfr;ksa o rF;ksa esa vko';d ik;h tk,A ¼izLrj 6 ls 10½
ORDER
1. This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with R.C. No.0072016A0008, registered with Police Station CBI, SPE, Dehradun for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B of the IPC.
2. An FIR was lodged by CBI on 08.08.2016 alleging that one Arun Kumar Sharma, the then Branch Manager, PNB, Vidhan Sabha Branch, Dehradun during the financial year 2009-10 inconnivance with V.K. Srivastava, the then DGM/Circle Head, V.K. Mahajan, the then AGM, V.K. Nagpal, the then AGM, A.K. Aneja, the then DGM, Smt. Archana Sethi, the then Chief Manager, H.S. Bhalla, the then Chief Manager, Sameer Bhatnagar, the then Manager, all of PNB Circle Office, Dehradun and Sanjay Poddar, partner of M/s. Vedant Steel Processing Centre, Roorkee (hereinafter referred to as 'M/s. Vedant') defrauded the Punjab National Bank to the tune of Rs.12 Crores by way of sanctioning a term loan of Rs.382 lakhs for Plant and Machinery and working capital (CC Limit) of Rs.750 lakhs in favour of M/s. Vedant for the purpose of processing of steel on 31.08.2009.
3. The FIR was registered under Sections 420, 468, 471, 120-B of I.P.C. and Section 13 (1) (d) read with Section 13 (2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. After investigation, charge sheet is filed. Learned trial court framed charges against the applicant under Sections 420, 468, 471 and 120-B of the I.P.C.
4. Heard Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned Senior Advocate assisted by Mr. Hari Mohan Bhatia, learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel for the C.B.I./ respondent.
5. Mr. D.K. Sharma, learned Senior Advocate submitted that the applicant has been falsely implicated; there is no allegation levelled against the applicant in the FIR; the name of the applicant was first time introduced in the charge-sheet without any evidence; according to the charge sheet, M/s. Vedant had distributed Rs.40 lakhs on 26.09.2009, Rs.20 lakhs on 29.09.2009 and Rs.20 lakhs on 16.11.2009 from its Term Loan to M/s. Otto Steel Section, whereas, M/s. Otto Steel Section (Roorkee) was incorporated first time in the year, 2010, firstly as a proprietorship firm and later on it was converted into a partnership firm and remained operative till 2013; this firm was closed on 03.10.2013; the applicant was one of the partner of that firm; other partner of the firm was Smt. Chhavi Jain; the Bank account in the name of M/s. Otto Steel Section (Roorkee) was opened first time in Punjab National Bank, Branch Roorkee on 28.10.2010; no payment was either received by his firm or by the applicant from M/s. Vedant; the only allegation against the applicant is that he was doing the business with M/s. Vedant and issued the cheque in favour of M/s. Vedant; the applicant's firm not only purchased the goods from M/s. Vedant, but also purchased the goods from other firms and sold that goods to different purchasers; the applicant is 50 years old and a heart patient; he has no criminal history and is in jail since 20.01.2020.
6. Per contra, Mr. Sandeep Tandon, learned counsel appearing for the respondent/C.B.I, submitted that the applicant was the proprietor of M/s. Otto Steel Section and during the course of investigation, it was found through hearsay evidence that the applicant was an employee of co-accused Sanjay Poddar in his firm M/s. Jinendra Strips and Tubes Ltd.; M/s. Otto Steel Section (Roorkee) was established only for purpose of diversion of funds; this firm was not existed at the given address; all the fake firms i.e. Ansh Sales Corporation, Vijeta Iron and Steels etc. sent money in the account of M/s. Otto Steel Section (Roorkee); no other transaction was happened in the account of M/s Otto Steel Section (Roorkee); the account of M/s. Otto Steel section was closed after the diversion of money; documents have been filed along with the charge sheet; document no.30 is the statement of account of the firm of the applicant
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.