LAWS(GJH)-2022-7-831

KISHORSINH DOLATSINH ZALA Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

Decided On July 22, 2022
Kishorsinh Dolatsinh Zala Appellant
V/S
STATE OF GUJARAT Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application is filed by the applicant-original complainant under Sec. 439(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure for cancellation of bail. The respondent No.2-original accused was enlarged on regular bail by an order dtd. 10/4/2018 in Criminal Misc. Application No.1035 of 2018 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot. Previously this application was tagged with another application being Criminal Misc. Application No.11947 of 2018 which was against the co-accused however, for the reasons recorded therein and respondent No.2 therein not being represented by any advocate, the present application is separated and heard separately.

(2.) Learned advocate appearing for the applicant which is a co- operative bank submitted that the respondent No.2 was the Director/partner in the firm which had received the financial facility/ CC facility against hypothecation of goods and when in the due course of the business of the bank when an inspection was carried out with the premises of the company, the hypothecated good were not found and it was informed to the bank that the same have been misappropriated, causing gross monetary loss to the bank. It is submitted that the respondent No.2 is also equally responsible as documentation bears the signature of the respondent No.2 as and when the loan facility and CC facility was received and therefore, it was also the responsibility of the respondent No.2 to protect the interest of the bank and the hypothecated goods. Despite this and there being clear ingredients of cheating including invoking of Sec. 409 of IPC, the Sessions Court has enlarged the respondent No.2 on bail by treating the transaction to be of civil nature.

(3.) Learned advocate appearing for the respondent No.2 drew attention of this Court to the affidavit-in-reply and submitted that the it was in fact the present respondent No.2 who had drawn attention of the bank as well as police authority to the illegal act committed by the co-accused Ravjibhai Thummar (respondent in Criminal Misc. Application No.11947 of 2018) and such attention was drawn well in advance advance, despite this the bank as well as police authorities have failed to take any action. It is submitted that while enlarging the respondent No.2 on bail, the Sessions Court has prescribed several conditions which the respondent No.2 has complied with and at present the evidence of prosecution is going on, which the respondent No.2 is attending scrupulously.