RAJESH MUNSHILAL MISHRA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The applicant, by way of this application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, seeks regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No.I-120 of 2018 registered with Sabarmati Police Station, Dist. Ahmedabad City, for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471, 477(a) and 34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860.

(2.) The FIR for the offences of criminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery and misappropriation of amount being filed against the applicant and other co-accused as named in the charge-sheet filed by the investigating officer. According to the prosecution case, in the year 1973, the officers/workers of ONGC had formed one co-operative credit society and one of the object of the society was to provide loan to all its members upto the amount of Rs.3 lakhs for which identification number called as C.P.F. No. being provided to the members and to manage the affairs of the society, the administrative work being allocated amongst two clerks namely (1) Ketan B. Patel and (2) Mr. Rajendrasinh Jadhav. It is the case of prosecution that in the year 2016, it came to the notice of the society that certain members who had not obtained loan, despite of this, the loan was sanctioned and bearer cheques were issued using forged signatures of the members. The society had undertaken an internal audit wherein two clerks named in the FIR had admitted the alleged transactions and for further scrutiny Special Auditor had submitted his report and accordingly, it was found that an amount of Rs.6,41,80,093/- has been siphoned off, for which the FIR came to be registered for the aforesaid offences as referred to above.

(3.) Mr. Sudhir Nanavati, learned Senior Counsel for the applicant would submit that the applicant was not named in the FIR. That the applicant had played an active role to inquire the alleged mischief committed by main accused no.1 and 2. That on the basis of Audit Report, the office bearers and committee members have been arraigned as accused in the alleged crime. That there is no iota of evidence to suggest that the applicant was the beneficiary of the alleged fraud and misappropriation of amount of the society. That, the charge-sheet has already been filed and the applicant is having permanent residence at Ahmedabad. In such circumstances, learned Senior Counsel prays for exercising the judicial discretion in favour of the applicant.