High CourtsSingle Bench

Ashok Puri vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

High Court Of Himachal Pradesh · Decided on 17 May 2021 · Citation: (2021) 05 SHI CK 0122

HON’BLE JUDGES
Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J
ACTS & SECTIONS REFERRED
Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 438 · Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Section 120B, 409, 467, 471, 477A
RESULT
Disposed Of
CASE NUMBER
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No.735 Of 2021
Ask AI about this case

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

No AI summary yet

Generate an eight-section analysis of this judgment — facts, issues, reasoning, ratio and a plain-language gist.

Judgment

49 paragraphs · 996 words

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

1.

Instant petition has been moved for grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No.4/2021 dated

07.04.2021, registered under Sections 409, 467, 471, 477A and 120ÂB of the Indian Penal Code, at Police Station State Vigilance and Anti Corruption

Bureau Una, District Una, Himachal Pradesh. Interim protection was granted to the petitioner vide order dated 20.04.2021, subject to the terms and

conditions stipulated therein.

2.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the status report.

3.

The prosecution case as it comes out from the status report is that:Â an FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint lodged by one Sh. Bhavak

Prashar. The complainant alleged that Sh. Kamal Dev Bhogal, the then Branch Manager of Kangra Central Co operative Bank Ltd., in connivance

with one Sandeep Kumar cheated the bank and misappropriated an amount of Rs.2.00 crore. During the year 2017, Sh. Kamal Dev Bhogal and Sh.

Sandeep Kumar prepared false loan applications in the name of ten individuals and got sanctioned Rs.20 lacs against each of the loan applications.

The loan amount was transferred to their CCL accounts and was withdrawn through forged cheques. During investigation, it came out that six out of

ten persons, who were residents of Himachal Pradesh stated that they neither sought the loan nor moved loan documents. Four persons were found

residents of State of Punjab, who also denied applying for obtaining loan amount. As per the status report, all the ten loans are NPA and total

outstanding is Rs.2,93,08,518/Â​.

4.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no role whatsoever in preparing of alleged false loan documents, sanctioning of

loan amount as well as in transferring of the loan amount in the CCL accounts. The petitioner was serving as Deputy General Manager in the

aforesaid bank at the relevant time. There is no document to link the petitioner with the offences alleged in the FIR. The petitioner has not received

the loan amount in question. Learned counsel also pointed out that both the accused persons i.e. Kamal Dev Bhogal as well as accused Sandeep

Kumar have been enlarged on bail. Kamal Dev Bhogal was granted bail by the learned Additional District Judge Una, District Una on 5 th May, 2021

and accused Sandeep Kumar was enlarged on bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate 1st ClassÂII Una, District Una on 12th April, 2021. Learned

counsel further submitted that the petitioner will abide by all the conditions, which may be imposed upon him in case of grant of bail and that he will not

influence the prosecution witnesses or temper with the prosecution evidence in any manner.

Learned Additional Advocate General while opposing the bail plea, fairly submitted that the petitioner has joined the investigation pursuant to the

interim protection granted to him and is cooperative with the investigating agency. Learned Additional Advocate General also exhorted that in case the

Court is inclined to grant bail to him, then the same be made subject to stringent conditions, including directing the petitioner to continue to cooperate

and join the investigation as and when directed by the investigating agency.

5.

As per the status report and as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner during the hearing of the case, the main accused i.e. Kamal Dev

Bhogal, the then Branch Manager of the concerned bank as well as Sh. Sandeep Kumar have already been enlarged on bail. Status report does not

directly link the petitioner with the FIR. Petitioner was serving as Deputy General Manager in the aforesaid bank at the time of commission of alleged

offence. Petitioner, during investigation, had statedly disclosed that he was not the sanctioning authority of the loan amount in question. The loan

amount was allegedly sanctioned by the main accused Kamal Dev Bhogal. Investigation carried out thus so far does not point out with any concrete

evidence documentary or otherwise to show that the loan amount fictitiously raised/approved/transferred in the accounts by the main accused was at

the instant of or for the benefit of the petitioner. As per the status report, petitioner has joined the investigation and is cooperating with the investigating

agency. Considering all these aspects including the fact that the main accused persons have already been enlarged on bail, no fruitful purpose would

be served by sending the petitioner to judicial custody, hence, the present petition is allowed and the interim order passed on 20.04.2021 is made

absolute, subject to following conditions:Â​

(i) Petitioner is directed to join the investigation of the case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law.

(ii). Petitioner shall not temper with the evidence or hamper the investigation in any manner whatsoever;

(iii). Petitioners will not leave India without prior permission of the Court;

(iv). Petitioner shall not make any inducement, threat or promise, directly or indirectly, to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the

facts of the case to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Court or any Police Officer;

(v). Petitioner shall inform the Station House Officer of the concerned police station about his place of residence during bail and trial. Any change in

the same shall also be communicated within two weeks thereafter. Petitioner shall furnish details of their Aadhar Card, Telephone Number, EÂmail,

PAN Card, Bank Account Numbers, if any; &

In case of violation of any of the terms & conditions of the bail, respondentÂState shall be at liberty to move appropriate application for cancellation of

the bail. It is made clear that observations made above are only for the purpose of adjudication of instant bail petition and shall not be construed as an

opinion on the merits of the matter. Learned Trial Court shall decide the main matter without being influenced by the above observations.

With the aforesaid observations, the present petitions stand disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous applications, if any.

Copy dasti.