Back
2009(8) Supreme 363
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
Altamas Kabir and Deepak Verma, JJ.
HDFC Bank Ltd. — Appellant
versus
J.J. Mannan @ J.M. John Paul & Anr. — Respondents
Criminal Appeal Nos. 2415 of 2009
Decided on : 16-12-2009
Criminal Procedure code, 1973 – Section 438 – Grant of Anticipatory Bail – Scope and ambit of – No blanket order can be passed under section 438 crpc. to prevent the accused from being arrested at all in connection with the case – Anticipatory bail should be of limited duration only and primarily on the expiry of that duration or extended duration, the court granting anticipatory bail should leave it to the regular court to deal with the matter on an appreciation of evidence placed before it after the investigation has made progress or the charge sheet is submitted – On the strength of an order granting anticipatory bail, an accused against whom charge has been framed, cannot avoid appearing before the trial court. (Para 14, 15)
Facts of the Case :
Issue in consideration in present case was whether High Court can grant a blanket order of anticipatory bail upto the end of trial.
Findings of the Court :
Held no blanket order can be passed under section 438 crpc. To prevent the accused from being arrested at all in connection with the case High Court in the instant case worded its order in such a way that it could be interpreted to mean that respondent 1 was not required to even appear and surrender before the court during the entire investigation stage and the trial.Such kind of an order is not contemplated u/s 438 Crpc. Hence impugned order of High Court modified to the extent that respondent to surrender before trial court and pray for regular bail. Appeal was allowed to said extent.
JUDGMENT
1. Leave granted.
2. This appeal has been filed by the H.D.F.C. Bank Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as the Bank”) against the judgment and order dated 3rd July, 2006, passed by the Madras High Court in Crl.M.P.No.3784 of 2006 and Crl.O.P.No.15217 of 2006, allowing the application filed by the Respondent No.1 under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) for grant of anticipatory bail to him.
3. According to the Bank, the Respondent No.1 in his capacity as the Managing Director of the Mannan Construction Corporation Private Limited, a company engaged in the execution of Highway Contracts and contracts of the Public Works Department (hereinafter referred to as “the Company”), along with one M/s. Immanuel projects Private Ltd. applied for a loan of Rs. 2,03,40,000/- (Rupees Two Crores, three lakhs and forty thousand) only, for purchase of 6 Krishna Electronic Sensor Paver Finishers from one M/s. Krishna Engineering Works in Ahmedabad. The said loan was duly sanctioned and after signing of necessary Agreements and other documents, six cheques for the loan amount of Rs.2,03,40,000/-, drawn in the name of M/s. Krishna Engineering Works, were handed over to the Respondent No.1 on 9th March, 2006. Subsequently, by a letter dated 24th May, 2006, the Bank informed M/s. Krishna Engineering Works in Ahmedabad that a sum of Rs.2,03,40,000/- had been disbursed to them on account of the Respondent No.1 and requested them to confirm receipt of the same. M/s. Krishna Engineering Works wrote back to the Bank stating that it had not received any payment on account of Mr. J.M. John Paul.
4. The Bank thereupon caused enquiries to be made and came to learn that no machineries had, in fact, been purchased by the Respondent No.1, and that the Respondent No.1 had colluded with M/s. Immanuel Projects Private Limited and their Directors and one Mr. R.I. Jambert Mathuram with the intention of cheating the Bank and in the process had committed offences punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B Indian Penal Code.
5. The Bank filed a complaint with the Commissioner of Police, Egmore, Chennai-600008 on 27th May, 2006, setting out the facts relating to sanction of the loan and the handing over of the six Banker’s cheques in the name of M/s. Krishna Engineering Works. The complaint also contained the manner in which the Respondent No.1 had opened a fictitious account with I.C.I.C.I. Bank, Tuticorin Branch, in the name of M/s. Krishna Engineering Works and deposited the cheques meant for supply of road construction equipment by Krishna Engineering Works of Ahmedabad. Thereafter, the said amount was encashed and transferred to M/s.” Matrix Enterprises having its off ice at No. 41, C.G.E. Colony, 5th Street, Tuticorin- 628 003, which was holding an account in the Tuticorin Branch of I.C.I.C.I. Bank. The said amounts were again transferred to the account of M/s. Delta Enterprises, also having its office at No. 41, C.G.E. Colony, 5th Street, Tuticorin, with the Tuticorin Branch of the I.C.I.C.I. Bank:
6. After the were finally aforesaid transactions, the moneys credited to the account of the Respondent No.1 In the same Branch of the I.C.I.C.I. Bank. It was also found on enquiry that the addresses of all the above-mentioned companies were that of the residence of the Respondent No.1, Mr. J.M. John Paul.
7. F.I.R. No.157 of 2006 dated 12th June, 2006, was drawn up on the basis of the aforesaid complaint against the Respondent No.1 and others by the Central Crime Branch, Chennai, under Sections 419, 420, 468, 473 read with Section 120B Indian Penal Code.
8. The Respondent No.1 thereupon filed an application in the Madras High Court under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of Anticipatory Bail and the learned Single Judge of the said High Court, by his order dated 3rd July, 2006, allowed the same upon holding that since the investigating agency had already seized all relevant and vital documents and had recorded the statements of
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
