JUDGEMENT

JYOTI SINGH, J. (ORAL)

1. This application has been filed on behalf of the Petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C, seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 475/2021 dated 26.11.2021 under Sections 420/468/471/120-B IPC registered at P.S.:

Sector-23, Dwarka.

2. Present FIR was registered on the complaint of one Dr. Ram Chander/Complainant who alleged that he is the registered owner of a built- up property bearing No. 401B, admeasuring 175 Sq. Yards, Sector-19, Dwarka, New Delhi (‘subject property’), which was purchased and built by him after obtaining bank loan by mortgaging the said property in favour of Punjab National Bank (‘PNB’), Kailash Colony, Delhi. On 05.10.2021 when Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAUSHAL BAIL APPLN. 3336/2023 Page 1 of 9 the wife of the Complainant visited the subject property, she found a notice dated 04.10.2021 affixed on the property reflecting that possession of the property was taken over on account of non-payment of the loan taken from PNB, C.R. Park, New Delhi. Complainant alleges that some unknown persons have managed to carry out a financial fraud by misusing title documents of his property by forging and fabricating the title documents. It is also alleged that one of the co-accused was inducted as a tenant in the property on the assurances of the property dealers in the area, however, through a well organized premeditated plan the miscreants have taken approximately Rs.2 crores as loan from PNB, Bhikaji Cama Place/C.R. Park by submitting forged title documents of the subject property.

3. Learned counsel for the Petitioner submits that Petitioner is a law abiding citizen and has retired from the post of Chief Manager, PNB, where he was working in the Retail Asset Processing Centre (‘RAPC’), Green Park, New Delhi from 10.01.2019 to 25.03.2020. Employees deployed at the RAPC were tasked to process and sanction retail loan proposals i.e. housing loans, educational loans and Overdraft limits (OD) against properties received from allocated branches, falling under South Delhi Circle and approximately 50 branches were allocated to RAPC, Green Park. It is submitted that in the present case, as per the banking norms, RAPC received the loan application form duly filled in and accompanied with requisite documents of the prospective borrower, from Branch Office, C.R. Park for sanction of overdraft limit of Rs.1.95 crores. As per guidelines issued vide Circulars dated 31.03.2016 and 05.12.2016, Petitioner was required to have an initial interaction and assess the potentiality of the loan and thereafter concerned officials at the respective branches were responsible to look into Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:KAUSHAL BAIL APPLN. 3336/2023 Page 2 of 9 the loan application form and other documents submitted by the borrower. The original title deeds of the property intended to be mortgaged were to be received by the Lead Generating Branch. On receipt of the proposal, Petitioner allocated the case to an Agency approved by PNB for due diligence of KYC documents, ITRs and addresses’ verification of the borrower and the guarantors. The report submitted did not show any adverse feature. Valuation of the property offered as collateral security was also carried out by an approved Valuer. As per norms prescribed by RBI and Head Office of PNB, legal opinion-cum-search of subject property documents was assigned to and was carried out by an Advocate, who also in her report stated that the property could be mortgaged as it was free from any encumbrance. Petitioner himself visited the business address of the borrower and met her, apart from inspecting the property sought to be mortgaged. After the process was completed, the Loan Manager scrutinized the due diligence reports and recommended the proposal for sanction of OD limit of Rs.1.95 crores and it was subsequent thereto that the Petitioner sanctioned the limit, based on the documents submitted and verified. In a nutshell, the case of the Pet