Allahabad High Court
Manoj Bansal vs Central Bureau Investigation Through ... on 28 February, 2023
Author: Dinesh Kumar Singh
Bench: Dinesh Kumar Singh
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD ?Court No. - 87 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1978 of 2023 Applicant :- Manoj Bansal Opposite Party :- Central Bureau Investigation Through Its S.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Raghav Dev Garg Counsel for Opposite Party :- Sanjay Kumar Yadav Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
1. Heard Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Raghav Dev Garg, learned counsel for the accused-applicant and Sri Gyan Prakash, learned Senior Advocate and Deputy Solicitor General of India, assisted by Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav for the Central Bureau of Investigation (for short ?CBI?) and perused record.
2. The present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking bail in anticipation of his arrest in F.I.R. No. RC-0219-2016 (E) 0008 dated 16.05.2016, under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 468, 471, 411 I.P.C. and substantive offences thereof, Police Station C.B.I./E.O.-I, New Delhi.
3. A complaint dated 04.09.2015 was received from Sri Anjan Chattopadhyay, Assistant General Manager of Punjab National Bank against Sri Ashwani Chanana and others. The allegation in the F.I.R. in brief is that Sri Ashwani Chanana, and Sri Girish Chanana, the Directors of M/s C.V.S. Steels Private Limited had obtained a Cash Credit Limit of Rs.900 Lakhs and Term Loan of Rs.8.80 Lakhs for running business of manufacturing and sale and purchase of items in steel which was renewed to the company on 04.03.2010 against the hypothecation of goods and book debts. To secure the loan, the original title deed of House No. KB-46, Kavi Nagar, Ghaziabad, was deposited in the bank by one Sri Jagamandar Dass Jain, for the purpose of creating Equitable Mortgage. The said house being a lease hold property, Sri Jagamandar Dass Jain/borrowers also furnished a letter dated 18.11.2011 purportedly issued by the Ghaziabad Development Authority granting permission to mortgage the said lease hold property. Since the permission period of three years was to run out on 17.11.2014, the officials of the bank wrote a request letter to Ghaziabad Development Authority for extension of permission to mortgage for a further period of 3 years. Thereafter, the Ghaziabad Development Authority vide letter dated 27.03.2015 had apprised that the permission to mortgage dated 18.11.2011 was not issued by the office of Ghaziabad Development Authority and it was a forged letter. Further allegation was that the accounts of the company became highly irregular and the borrower did not repay the loan amount despite repeated reminders by the bank, hence the account of the borrower was classified as NPA 31.03.2014 with total outstanding amount of Rs.10,15,59,249.50.
4. After investigation of the case, charge sheet has been filed against six persons, including one public servant. In respect of Sri R.K. Sharma, the then Assistant General Manager, Punjab National Bank, Noida, the prosecution sanction for prosecuting the said public servant was denied under Section 19 of the Prevention of Corruption Act.
5. Allegation against the accused-applicant, who was a partner of the firm known as M/s Universal Steel and Alloys, is regarding diversion and round-tripping of the funds of the bank, which was made available to M/s C.V.S. Steels Private Limited by the bank.
6. Sri Anurag Khanna, learned Senior Advocate for the accused-applicant has drawn the attention of the Court towards some documents to show that the accused-applicant had resigned from the partnership of the aforesaid firm in the year 2007, whereas the allegation of round-tripping and depositing some amount in the account of M/s Universal Steel and Alloys is of the year 2009. He further submits that when the accused-applicant was not the partner of the said firm, which is evident from Form-15 of the U.P. Trade Tax Act and Rules made thereunder, in which it was clearly mentioned that there were only two partners and the accused-applicant was not the partner at that time, the allegation against the accused-applicant that he was also involved in the alleged commission of offence, would not be justified. He has also drawn the attention of the Court towards the audited balance sheet of M/s Universal Steel and Alloys dated 29.8.2008, which also mentioned the names of only two partners and the accused-applicant was not a partner. He also submits that it appears that name of the accused-applicant remained in the bank account of the firm as one of the partners and on that basis, he has been made an accused, but in fact he had resigned from the partnership firm way back in the year 2007 itself. He, therefore, submits that there is hardly any evidence to connect the accused-applicant in the commission of offence and, therefore, he may be enlarged on anticipatory bail.
7. On the other hand, Sri Gyan Prakash, learned counsel for the CBI has submitted that the accused-applicant did no produce these documents/papers during the investigation. These papers which are being shown and have been filed with the anticipatory bail application, do not form part of the charge sheet/CBI report. He has further submitted that name of the accused-applicant was not struck off from the account of the firm in the bank and all the partners, who are the account holders, have been made accused.
8. I have considered the submissions advanced on behalf of the learned counsel for the parties.
9. Two other accused are the brothers of the accused-applicant. It appears that the partnership firm was a family concern. However, some Government documents would suggest that the accused-applicant had resigned from the partnership firm in the year 2007.
10. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and the documents which have been placed on record, this Court is of the view that the accused-applicant is entitled to be admitted on anticipatory bail.
11. Accordingly, this anticipatory bail application is allowed and it is directed that accused-applicant shall appear before the trial court within seven days from today and furnish a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the court concerned. On furnishing personal bond and sureties, the accused-applicant shall be admitted on anticipatory bail in the aforesaid case crime number subject to the following conditions:-
(i) That the accused-applicant shall make himself available for interrogation by police authorities as and when required and will cooperate with the investigation;
(ii) That the accused- applicant shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the cases so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the court or to any police officer; and
(iii) That the accused-applicant shall not leave India without previous permission of the Court.
12. In case of breach of any of the said conditions or in case it is otherwise found for any other reason the bail is required to be cancelled, it shall be open for the State or the appropriate authority to move an application for cancellation of bail in accordance with law.
Order Date :- 28.2.2023 Rao/-