LI Network
Published on: November 30, 2023 at 15:14 IST
The Punjab & Haryana High Court has granted bail to a Bank Manager accused of disbursing a loan based on forged documents.
Justice Kuldeep Tiwari, while considering the case, emphasized that the bank possesses alternative means to recover the loan amount from the accused individuals.
The court, led by Justice Tiwari, stated, “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 the recovery of the loan amount, the present petition is allowed.”
Anil Kumar, the petitioner and Bank Manager, filed the plea under Section 439 of the CrPC. The charges against him included Sections 419, 420, 467, 468, and 471 of the IPC. The allegations involved the creation of forged documents related to revenue records to secure a loan of Rs.17,00,000 under the Kisan Credit Card Scheme.
It was claimed that the accused had already obtained loans from different banks, with the land in question being mortgaged to the complainant bank.
The petitioner’s counsel argued that Anil Kumar had been falsely implicated and had no involvement in the alleged forgery. The defense maintained that he had merely fulfilled his duties as a prudent person.
The court, considering the fundamental precept of criminal jurisprudence, including the presumption of innocence and the gravity of offenses involved, acknowledged the right to a speedy trial as a detained person’s right.
Referring to the Supreme Court’s decision in Siddharam Satlingappa Mhetre v. State of Maharashtra, the court stressed the need to strike a balance between an individual’s liberty and society’s interests in bail decisions.
Highlighting that the trial was at a “very initial stage” and based primarily on documents, the court noted that the petitioner had been in custody since February 6, 2023, and had already deposited fifty percent of the borrowed amount with the complainant bank.
The court concluded that, considering the alternatives available to the bank for recovering the loan amount, granting bail to the petitioner would not hinder the bank’s legal recourse.
In light of these considerations, the court granted bail to the petitioner, Anil Kumar.
Case Title: Anil Kumar v. State of Haryana