The High Court of Punjab and Haryana granted bail to a bank manager accused of disbursing funds based on forged documents and held that the Bank has other alternate remedies to recover the loan amount from the accused persons and the grant of bail to the petitioner will neither cause any impediment nor will curtail the right of the Bank to take such legal recourse, as it deems fit for recovery of loan amount
Brief Facts:
The petitioner, a bank manager filed the present petition under Section 439 CrPC after he was booked under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the IPC after it was alleged that two men by creating forged documents of the revenue record, obtained loan of Rs.17,00,000 under Kisan Credit Card Scheme. It was stated they had already obtained loans from different banks on the land in question, which was mortgaged to the complainant bank.
Contentions of the Petitioner:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner contended that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case, as he does not have any role in the alleged forgery, rather he had only discharged his duties as a prudent person. Moreover, since the challan already stands presented and charges are yet to be framed, the trial is also likely to take a long time to conclude, therefore, the petitioner is entitled to grant regular bail.
Contentions of the Respondent:
The learned counsel appearing on behalf of the respondents opposed the grant of bail to the petitioner on the ground that he had colluded with the accused and thereby duped the bank by disbursing a loan of Rs.17,00,000/- on the basis of forged documents, however, on instructions imparted to him by the complainant-bank, he has admitted the factum qua fifty per cent of the principal amount being deposited by the one of the accused. Further, it was submitted that the challan had already been filed in the present case and further the prosecution has already cited 10 witnesses.
Observations of the court:
The court stated that the right to a speedy trial is one of the rights of a detained person. However, while deciding an application for regular bail, the Courts shall also take into consideration the fundamental precept of criminal jurisprudence, which is “the presumption of innocence”, besides the gravity of the offences involved.
The court referred to the judgment in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra wherein the Supreme Court has insisted upon striking "a perfect balance of sanctity of an individual’s liberty as well as the interest of the society, in grant or refusing bail."
The court further stated that the trial is at a very initial stage and the entire evidence was based on documents further the petitioner has been behind bars since 06.02.2023 and he has already deposited fifty per cent of the borrowed amount with the complainant bank. Moreover, considering the fact that the Bank has other alternate remedies/mechanisms to recover the loan amount from the accused persons, as also the fact that the grant of bail to the petitioner will neither cause any impediment nor will curtail the right of the Bank to take such legal recourse, as it deems fit for recovery of the loan amount
The decision of the Court:
The court allowed the petition and granted bail to the petitioner.
Case Title: Anil Kumar vs State of Haryana
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldeep Tiwari
Case No.: CRM-M No.38846 of 2023
Advocate for the Petitioner: Mr. Ashit Malik
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Chetan Sharma
Read Judgment @LatestLaws.com
Picture Source :
