Jharkhand High Court
Anupama Raj vs The State Of Jharkhand on 13 January, 2017
Author: Rajesh Shankar
Bench: Rajesh Shankar
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 10337 of 2016
Anupama Raj ... ... Petitioner
Versus
The State of Jharkhand ... ... Opp. Party
---
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJESH SHANKAR
---
For the Petitioner : Mr. Ranjan Kumar Singh, Advocate
For the Opp. Party : Mrs. Laxmi Murmu, A.P.P.
---
2/13.01.2017Heard learned counsel for the parties.
Petitioner is an accused in a case registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409,420,467,468,471,472 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that earlier bail application of the petitioner was rejected vide order dated 04.02.2015 in B.A. No. 5103 of 2014. By way of present bail application, petitioner has renewed his prayer for bail.
It is alleged in the F.I.R. that against the deposits made by 37 customers, 91 fixed deposit receipts have been issued from the ICICI Bank, Godda Branch. On maturity when the customers produced those certificates for encashments, excuses were made to them and they were made to visit bank for months together. Then the matter was reported to higher officials and it could be learnt that the fixed deposit receipts issued by the Branch are forged and fabricated. The deposit made by the customers remained unaccounted in the system of the bank. Some of the customers have specifically mentioned name of some of the accused persons to whom either they had given money in cash or through cheque which were encashed by them on assurance to issue fixed deposit receipts. The petitioner was posted at Godda Branch at the relevant time.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that co- accused Ravi Sharma who was the branch manager of the ICICI Bank, Godda branch and whose bail application was earlier rejected by a co- ordinate Bench of this Court was subsequently granted bail vide order dated 05.11.2015 in B.A. No. 4537 of 2015. Thereafter other co-accused persons who were employees of the same bank namely Vikash Kumar @ Bikash Kumar @ Viklash Kumar Gupta, Amaresh Roy @ Amresh @ Amresh Rai, Saroj Kumar Jha @ Saroj Jha and Pandey Vishwajeet @ Pandey Bishwajeet @ Bishwajeet have been granted bail by a co-ordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 06.05.2016 in B.A. No. 10052 of 2015, B.A. No. 10174 of 2015, B.A. No. 10399 of 2015 and in B.A. No. 195 of 2016 respectively. The petitioner was also posted in the same branch as Deputy Manager. In view of the fact that almost all the accused persons have already been granted bail by the co-ordinate Bench of this Court, the petitioner's prayer for bail who is in custody since 17.01.2014, may be considered sympathetically.
Learned A.P.P. has opposed the petitioner's prayer for bail. Considering the fact that the petitioner is in judicial custody for about three years, I am inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail. Accordingly, the petitioner, named above, is directed to be released on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Godda, in connection with Godda (Town) P.S. Case No. 479 of 2013, corresponding to G.R. No. 1428 of 2013.
(Rajesh Shankar, J.) Binit/