Allahabad High Court
Prem Chand vs State Of U.P. on 12 January, 2023
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No.- 85 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 10978 of 2022 Applicant :- Prem Chand Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Sushmita Mukherjee,Abhijeet Mukherji Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Jyotsna Sharma,J.
1. Heard Ms. Sushmita Mukherjee, learned counsel for the applicant, Sri O.P. Mishra, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the papers on record.
2. This application has been moved on behalf of the applicant- Prem Chand seeking anticipatory bail in Case Crime No.766 of 2020, under sections- 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., Police Station- Singhani, District- Ghaziabad.
3. As per prosecution case, a bogus account, in the name of Charanjeet Lal Bagga who had died long ago, was opened on 20.12.2014 in Punjab National Bank by the Branch Manager Durga Prasad; at the time of opening this account, he (i.e. a person impersonating as Charanjeet Lal Bagga) was identified by one Lakshy Kumar Tanwar; loan was sanctioned by the present applicant, the then Branch Manager of Punjab National Bank, Branch- RAB Ghaziabad, in the name of Smt. Alka Rani of Rs.1,50,00,000/- purportedly sister of Lakshy Kumar Tanwar with account no.NC12268 and whole of the loan amount was transferred to the account of non-existent person Charanjeet Lal Bagga and the same was, through cheque no.914486 was transferred in the account of Lakshy Kumar Tanwar; the transaction was done through this bogus account in connivance with the Branch Managers Prem Chand, Durga Prasad, Lakshy Kumar Tanwar etc.; the conspiracy to expropriate money was hatched in a planned manner with involvement of Branch Manager Prem Chand; it is alleged in the F.I.R. that in a well planned strategy the accused persons namely Lakshy Kumar Tanwar, Prem Chand, Durga Prasad, Smt. Alka Rani, Naresh Kumar Bagga expropriated the money; the loan account was then shown as NPA (Non-Profiting Asset) and money has been apportioned by the accused persons between them. On the basis of this, an F.I.R. has been lodged under sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 409 I.P.C., Police Station- Sihani Gate, District- Ghaziabad against Lakshy Kumar Tanwar, Prem Chand, Durga Prasad, Smt. Alka Rani, Naresh Kumar Bagga and one unknown person and is being investigated upon. It is brought to my notice that charge-sheet has been submitted against some of the accused persons namely Lakshy Kumar Tanwar and Naresh Kumar Bagga and investigation is pending against rest of the accused including the present applicant.
4. It is contended on behalf of the applicant that he had no responsibility to verify the fact that the person, in whose name account was opened, was in existence or not and that he was merely a loan sanctioning authority. It is contended that he had no participation in the papers being prepared. Therefore, having no responsibility for the same, he received no monetary benefits from this episode. Hence, the applicant deserves to be granted anticipatory bail to protect his liberty.
5. The application for anticipatory bail is opposed by the opposite side ardently putting before me several facts as below:-
(i) The bogus account was opened in the year 2014 in the name of a person Charanjeet Lal Bagga, who had died long ago and bogus papers were prepared for sanctioning the loan by impersonation as Charanjeet Lal Bagga. During investigation, Mr. Bagga's death certificate has been collected
(ii) In the F.I.R. itself, it is said that the present applicant was holding a post of Branch Manager, hence it cannot be said that he had no role to play or had no responsibility to verify the relevant facts before sanctioning the loan.
(iii) It is also brought to the notice of this Court that the same applicant was also involved in another case of similar nature being Case Crime No.347 of 2019, under sections- 420, 467, 468, 471, 406 I.P.C., Police Station- Ghaziabad Kotwali, District- Ghaziabad.
(iv) It is argued that proper interrogation may be required for unveiling the relevant facts from the persons involved in this episode in which the public money has been misappropriated with impunity. Unless the Investigating Officer get an opportunity to thoroughly interrogate the present applicant, the investigation may not be so effective.
(v) The pre-arrest is a kind of protection, which may hamper the ful-fledged investigation by the Investigating Office.
(vi) The matter involves not only expropriation of public money, but also the credibility of public institution bank. The nature of the accusation demands deeper investigation.
6. Prima-facie, it may be kept in mind that anticipatory bail is an extraordinary remedy to be exercised in suitable cases only. The power for good cannot be utilized in a routine manner as a substitute for regular bail. This discretionary power calls for existence of facts of the kind where the court is satisfied that its interference is necessary to further the cause of justice and to prevent misuse of process of law.
7. I considered the nature of accusation, role played by the applicant and all attending facts and circumstances of the case. I do not find it a fit case to grant benefit of anticipatory bail.
8. Hence the anticipatory bail application is rejected.
9. However, any of the observations made herein shall not be taken as a comment on merits of the case and the court below shall be at liberty to form its own opinion at any stage of the case.
Order Date :- 12.1.2023 Saif