COMMON ORDER

[ Bail Appl..6076/2020, Bail Appl..6218/2020, Bail Appl..6492/2020, Bail Appl..7281/2020 ]

Dated this the 4th day of January 2021 Applications under Section 438 Cr.P.C for anticipatory bail.

2. The applicants in BA Nos.6218/2020, 6492/2020, 7281/2020 and 6076/2020 are accused numbers 1, 2, 3 and 5, respectively, in Crime No. 2729/2020 of Kollam East Police Station for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 468 and 469 read with Section 34 of the I.P.C.

3. The prosecution case, in brief, is that the de facto complainant, who is impleaded as the 2nd respondent in the above applications, and his wife were members of Kadappakkada Branch of Pattathanam Service Co-operative Bank. On 23.11.2012, they pledged 171.5 and 87.7 grams of gold ornaments respectively in the aforesaid bank and obtained gold loans of ₹4,00,000/- and ₹2,05,000/- respectively. Thereafter, they remitted ₹1,70,534/-and ₹87,499/-, respectively, towards the aforesaid gold loan towards interest due on 31.08.2015. The loans were renewed and subsequently they wanted to redeem the said loan. A2 who was the accountant informed them that the gold loan was already closed and the ornaments returned to them on 07.02.2016. When the de facto complainant challenged this fact, it was stated that the ornaments were auctioned and sold on the aforesaid day. In fact no auction was conducted at all. No notice regarding such auctioning was also received by the de facto complainant and his wife. It is alleged that the accused had in furtherance of common intention to cheat, created forged documents by putting the signatures of the de facto complainant and his wife and had misappropriated the ornaments pledged. The complainant and his wife thus sustained a loss of ₹18 lakhs. During the course of the investigation based on a complaint filed by the de facto complainant, the 4th accused committed suicide. The investigation is proceeding against the applicants. They would contend that the allegations made against them are all untrue and therefore, they seek pre-arrest bail.

4. A1 has in her bail application contended that she was working as Secretary in the head office of the Bank. Enquiry was initiated on certain reports which were filed by the Joint Registrar of Cooperative Society regarding the irregularities in auctioning the gold ornaments pledged with the Kadappakkada branch of the society. This Court had vide Judgment at Annexure-3 observed that the suspension of A1 was not proper and the direction was given to follow procedures in accordance with law. Accordingly the suspension was revoked by the Joint Registrar vide Annexure-5 Order dated 10.08.2018. It is only subsequent to the setting aside of the suspension and reinstatement of A1 that the aforesaid F.I.R at Annexure-1 was registered in this Crime on 16.08.2020.

5. A2 has in his application contended that a customer can pledge gold ornaments for a period of 6 months. Notice was issued thereafter to redeem the ornaments. The customer can renew the pledge or redeem the ornaments. The other option left to the customer is to intimate the Bank to auction the gold ornaments and proceed to close a loan. In the instant case, notice was issued to the de facto complainant by registered post after the expiry of the loan period. There was no response and consequently, the pledged ornaments were auctioned and the amounts adjusted towards closing of the loan. Complaint filed by the de facto complainant and his wife was investigated upon by the unit inspector on the basis of a report of the Secretary (A1) dated 07.09.2017, produced by A2 at Annexure-II to the effect that all procedures pertaining to auction were complied. Two receipts issued by the bank to the de facto complainant and his wife are at Annexures-III and IV. Normally, at the time of granting loan on pledging of gold ornaments the customer has to subscribe signatures at 5 places in the application. A mistake has occurred in the instant ca