IMPORTANT POINT
The main legal point established in the judgment is the presumption of innocence, the need for a humane attitude in dealing with bail applications, and the discretion of the court in granting or denying bail based on the nature of accusations and the progress of the investigation.

JUDGMENT

1. This petition has been filed by the petitioners under Section 439 Cr.P.C. praying to enlarge them on bail in connection with FIR No.05(03)2022 under Sections 403/409/420/120-B/468/471/477A/34 IPC and Section 13 of PC Act on the file of CB Police Station.

2. The case of the prosecution is that on 2.3.2022, the Manager of Punjab National Bank, Kanglatongbi Branch reported that a possible fraud in the Start Up Manipur Government Scheme was committed by some officials of Punjab National Bank, namely Singshit Khupden, Manager in collusion with other persons. The Start Up Scheme was introduced by the State Government in 2018 with an aim to enable unemployed persons to take up new ventures with subsidies ranging from Rs.1 lakh to Rs.30 lakh. The loan amount is to be sanctioned first by the bank (70% component) and after that, the Government will release 30% component as subsidy. The borrower has to open a loan account and the loan amount will be credited to the said account. On 5.11.2021, the Bank of Baroda, the Nodal Bank of the Start Up Scheme deposited a sum of Rs.1,77,09,000/- to Punjab National Bank, Kanglatongbi Branch with respect to 7 approved beneficiaries. However, without opening of loan accounts, the subsidy amounts were deposited in the personal accounts of the beneficiaries. This irregularity was detected in the follow up meeting and hence, FIR No.5(3)2022 under Sections 403/409/420/120-B/468/471/477A/34 IPC and Section 13 of PC Act was registered against the accused persons.

3. Mr. P. Praveen Kumar, the learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that the petitioners are innocent, who have been made to suffer bare allegations of being involved in the commission of the offences aforesaid without any cogent material and that no prima facie case has been made out against them till date. He would submit that the then Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Kanglatongbi Branch was already released on bail.

4. The learned counsel further submitted that out of five accused arrested in connection with the alleged offence, three have been released on bail and only the petitioners remain in judicial custody and that they being similarly situated persons are also entitled to be released on bail. Earlier, the petitioners filed Cril. Misc. (B) Case No.73 of 2022 before the Special Judge, Imphal West and by the order dated 8.7.2022, the learned Special Judge rejected the bail petition. According to learned counsel, while rejecting the bail petition of the petitioners, the learned Special Judge recorded only mechanical reason that there is no additional ground for granting bail to the petitioners. The reasoning given by the learned Special Judge is vague and therefore, the same is liable to be set aside. The learned counsel would submit that the petitioners are in custody from 18.5.2022 and since best part of investigation completed, the petitioners are entitled to be released on bail.

5. Per contra, Mr. H. Samarjit, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor submitted that the investigation reveals that the petitioners hatched a plan with the then Branch Manager Singsit to swindle beneficiaries subsidy amounts without the full knowledge of the beneficiaries. It was planned that the Manager will take care the Bank side and the second petitioner Ibohanbi will take care the remaining sides. The Branch Manager has loan sanctioning power of Rs.10 lakh only. The Manager and the arrested accused, including the petitioners conspired to misappropriate the beneficiaries subsidy amounts and committed criminal offence.

6. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor further submitted that 4 different beneficiaries from whom money were transferred to M/S SOS Traders dealing in different businesses like poultry, rice mill, embroidery and plastic waste recycle. So the money transferred to M/S SOS Traders is not for supplying of equipment to various enterprises.

7. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor then submitted that both the petitioners w