RAJESHBHAI DAHYABHAI PARMAR Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of the present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, the applicant original accused has prayed to release him on anticipatory bail in case of his arrest in connection with the FIR registered as C.R No.11201016200005 of 2020 before CID Crime, Surat Zone Police Station, District: Surat City for the offences punishable under sections 406, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

(2.) Mr. Mrugen Purohit, learned advocate for the applicant has submitted that the applicant is retired from service as Branch Manager and he had faced preliminary and departmental inquiry with the allegation of negligence in performing his duty. The main culprits are the borrowers of the loan who by creating forged documents have borrowed loan and used it for another purpose. Mr. Purohit has further submitted that out of Rs.4,49,00,000, the borrowers have already deposited Rs.2,15,00,000/- and the applicant who was serving at the relevant time as a Manager in Mota Varachha Branch of Bank of Baroda, has no relation in any of the transactions of Bank of Baroda, Mota Varachha Branch. He has therefore, requested to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant.

(3.) Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing on behalf of the respondent-State has opposed grant of anticipatory bail looking to the nature and gravity of the offence and has submitted that the applicant has failed to verify the documents and without making proper inspection, sanctioned the loan in connivance with the borrowers and has gained monetary benefits in sanctioning the loans. There is strong prima-facie case and hence, requested not to exercise the discretion.