Indu Walia vs State Of Himachal Pradesh

Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J

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 19.04.2021, subject to the terms and conditions stipulated therein.

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

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The loan amount was transferred to their CCL accounts and was withdrawn through forged cheques.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​.

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

sanctioning of loan amount as well as in transferring of the loan amount in the CCL accounts. 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 further submitted that the petitioner

alongwith her husband were doing real estate business. The petitioner stood as guarantor in respect of six separate loan accounts regarding the

property dealing business carried out by her alongwith her husband. Loanees therein had received notices in respect of attachment of the property

involved therein. To avoid such attachment, petitioner had deposited the requisite amount in the said six loan accounts. Learned counsel for the

petitioner further submitted that the petitioner has not been made an accused in FIR No.7/2019 dated 30.07.2018, registered under Sections 420, 467,

468, 471, 120(B) of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, presently being investigated at SIU SV &ACB Shimla.

It is also contended that the complainant in the instant FIR, holds grudges against the husband of the petitioner and in past also has lodged false

complaint against the petitioner’s husband. 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 5th 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 her in case of grant of bail and

that she 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 her and is cooperating the investigating agency. However, in case the Court is inclined to grant bail to her, 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.

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. Investigation carried out thus so far does not point out with any concrete evidence documentary or otherwise

to show that the loan amount allegedly fictitiously raised/approved/transferred in the accounts by the main accused was at the instance 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, a lady aged 47 years in present CovidÂ19 pandemic scenario to judicial custody, hence, the present petition is allowed and

the interim order passed on 19.04.2021 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. However she

shall not be called in the police station before 9.00 A.M. and after 5.00 P.M;

(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.