Rahul Gupta vs Union Of India
2021 Latest Caselaw 8760 MP

                                                                       1                       MCRC-47255-2021
                                          The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
                                                  MCRC No. 47255 of 2021
                                                           (RAHUL GUPTA Vs UNION OF INDIA)


                                  Jabalpur, Dated : 14-12-2021
                                         Shri Shri Manish Datt, learned senior counsel with Shri Pawan Gujar,

                                  learned counsel for the applicant.
                                         Shri J.K. Jain, learned Assistant Solicitor General for the respondent-

CBI.

Case diary perused.

This is the second application under Section 439 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of bail. Applicant Rahul Gupta was arrested on 23/02/2021 in connection with Crime No.RC0082017A0012 registered at C.B.I, A.C.B., Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 of the IPC and Section 13(1)(d), 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act.

The earlier bail application filed by applicant was dismissed on merit by this Court vide order dated 22/07/2021 passed in M.Cr.C.No.22449/2021.

As per the prosecution case, on 25/11/2017 complainant Shri Santosh Kumar Tiwari, the then Regional Manager, Central Madhya Pradesh Gramin

Bank, Regional Office, Hoshangabad lodged a written complaint at C.B.I., A.C.B., Bhopal averring that during the period from 08/01/2014 to 06/01/2017 co-accused Gendalal Rajput the then Branch Manager & applicant Rahul Gupta the then Office Assistant of Central Madhya Pradesh Gramin Bank, Shivpur, Branch Hoshangabad entered into a criminal conspiracy with co- accused Deependra Rajpoot an agent of Reliance Life Insurance Company, co-accused Shambhu Singh Pawar and other unknown persons and in pursuance thereof fraudulently sanctioned and disbursed 163 Kishan credit card loans, on the basis of forged documents without the knowledge of said account holders. The said KCC loan amount was transferred to the savings bank account of co-accused Sambhu Singh. Later on, the applicant and co- accused persons used the said amount to deposit the premium of various insurance policies through the agency code of co-accused Deependra Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.12.15 17:08:53 IST 2 MCRC-47255-2021 Rajpoot and in lieu of that they received the commission. Thus, the applicant and co-accused misappropriated a sum of Rs.6,42,31,951.89.

Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the crime. There is no direct evidence on record to connect the applicant with the crime. The applicant did not prepare

any forged documents. The applicant only made entries in the ledger at the instance of co-accused Gendalal Rajput, the then Branch Manager. There is no allegation against the applicant that he took any money from any person or embezzled any amount. He further submitted that it is alleged that the applicant embezzled a sum of Rs.6,50,000/-. The applicant is ready to deposit the said amount (Rs.6,50,000/-) under protest. The applicant has been in custody since 23/02/2021. The charge sheet has been filed and the conclusion of the trial will take time, hence prayed for the release of the applicant on bail.

Learned counsel for the respondent-CBI opposed the prayer stating that the applicant who was posted as Office Assistant in Central Madhya Pradesh Gramin Bank, Shivpur, Branch Hoshangabad from 06/09/2013 to 01/03/2017 in connivance with co-accused Gendalal Rajput, Deependra Rajpoot and Shambhu Singh Pawar had opened loan accounts of many persons, who were not physically present in the Branch. The applicant also verified certain vouchers wherein he failed to ensure that whether vouchers were signed by the account holder or not. The applicant made entries in the ledger and make payments without a withdrawal slip/cheque. Even, he made payment to the persons, who were already dead. Thus, the applicant in connivance with other co-accused persons embezzled a sum of Rs.6,42,31,951.89. The earlier bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed on merit, thereafter there is no change in circumstance, so he should not be released on bail.

The earlier bail application filed by the applicant was dismissed on

Signature Not Verified merit by this Court vide order dated 22/07/2021 passed in SAN

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.12.15 17:08:53 IST 3 MCRC-47255-2021 M.Cr.C.No.22449/2021, thereafter there has been no change in the circumstances, except the custody period. Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajesh Ranjan Yadav alias Pappu Yadav v. CBI Through its Director reported in (2007) 1 SCC 70 held that bail, can not be granted solely on the ground of long incarnation in jail and inability of accused to conduct the defence. Apex Court in the case of State of M.P. v. Kajad, (2001) 7 SCC 673 observed "It is true that successive bail applications are permissible under the changed circumstances. But without the change in the circumstances, the second application would be deemed to be seeking review of the earlier judgment which is not permissible under criminal law as has been held by this Court in Hari Singh Mann v. Harbhajan Singh Bajwa

[(2001) 1 SCC 169 : 2001 SCC (Cri) 113] and various other judgments."

Looking to the allegations that the applicant in connivance with other accused persons misappropriated a sum of Rs.6,42,31,951.89, the involvement of the applicant in the crime and enormity of fraud, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the applicant.

Accordingly, M.Cr.C. is rejected.

(RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE

as

Signature Not Verified SAN

Digitally signed by ANURAG SONI Date: 2021.12.15 17:08:53 IST