Back
HIGH COURT OF KERALA
ASHOK MENON, J
SANKAR RAJA M V – Appellant
Versus
S I OF POLICE THRISSUR TOWN EAST POLICE STATION – Respondent
Bail Appl./4909/2020
Bail - Anticipatory Bail - Cr.P.C Section 438 - Applicant, a bank manager, allegedly misappropriated gold loans. Court emphasized managerial responsibility in financial institutions and denied anticipatory bail, stressing the need for custodial interrogation.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a former Senior Manager at a bank, is accused of misappropriating gold pledged for loans by closing accounts without customer consent, allegedly involving impersonation. He claims ignorance of actions taken by a Gold Mithra Agent.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant, as a Senior Manager, cannot claim ignorance of bank operations, particularly the closure of gold loans, which involves responsibilities as a trustee of pledged items. Custodial interrogation was deemed necessary.
Issues: Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to the applicant accused of financial misconduct in a banking institution.
Ratio Decidendi: A bank manager must be aware of transactions in their branch; ignorance does not absolve them of responsibility. Anticipatory bail is only granted under exceptional circumstances, which were not present here.
Final Decision: Anticipatory bail denied; applicant directed to surrender to the investigating officer.
ORDER
Dated this the 17th day of November 2020 This is an application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking anticipatory bail.
The applicant is the first accused in Crime No.2640/2020 of Thrissur East Town Police Station, Thrissur, for having allegedly committed offences punishable under Sections 406, 409, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 r/w Section 34 of the IPC.
2. The prosecution case, in brief, is that while the applicant was holding the post of Senior Manager of the Catholic Syrian Bank, M.G Road, Thrissur branch, he closed some gold loan accounts of customers by impersonation, and allegedly misappropriated the gold pledged in the Bank by them. At least four customers approached the bank with complaints, stating that without their knowledge their loan account had been closed and the gold redeemed from the bank and misappropriated. The applicant states that he is innocent, puts the entire blame on a lady named Jayasree, who was the ‘Gold Mithra Agent’ appointed by the bank. She was instrumental in inducing various customers to apply for and obtaining gold loans from the bank. The applicant as well as the Assistant Manager are also implicated as accused in the crime. The applicant was suspended and retired from service pending an inquiry. The Assistant Manager was subjected to penalty by a reduction in rank.
3. The applicant admits that he was the Manager. But he was not in the know of things regarding the closure of the gold loans and misappropriation of the gold by persons impersonating as customers. He totally disassociated himself with the crime and therefore he seeks anticipatory bail. It is pointed out that he is 61 years old and has retired from service.
There is no possibility of his fleeing from justice. Amount due to him as retiral benefit is still retained by the bank, to make good the loss sustained by the customers.
4. Heard the learned counsel for the applicant and the learned Public Prosecutor as also the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant bank.
5. It is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant bank that in order to restore the reputation of the bank, such incidents of misappropriation by employees of Bank cannot be tolerated. Stringent action needs to be taken and unless the applicant is subjected to custodial interrogation, the entire facts and circumstances relating to the offence will not come to the fore. Hence, it is submitted that the applicant may not be granted anticipatory bail. The learned Public Prosecutor also supported the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the de facto complainant and submits that the applicant will have to be subjected to custodial interrogation to unravel the intricacies relating to the offence.
6. The learned counsel appearing for the applicant submits that the applicant has no criminal antecedents, he had a long service with the bank without any room for complaint thus far. It is only because of some lapse in supervision that the others took advantage, and resulted in his being implicated in this crime in which he had no active role, submits the learned counsel for the applicant. It is also pointed out that it is a Gold Mithra Agent named Jayasree who was the main perpetrator of the crime and persons who were brought by her impersonated as the debtors and closed the gold loan at her behest. The applicant claims to have no knowledge about the incident.
7. After having heard the submissions made on either side, I find that the applicant being the senior manager of the branch cannot pretend to be ignorant of the activities that take place in the bank, particularly pertaining to the closure of the gold loans. The bank is in the custody of the pledged gold loans as a trustee and in case it is returned, it is the responsibility of the Manager to see that the gold is returned to the real owner who pledged it. Therefore, the applicant cannot skulk from his responsibilities of being a Manager. He has to be subjected to th
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
