KAMAL KISHORE SHUKLA Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) S. K. Verma, J. The applicant is involved in case crime No. 902 of 1992 under Sections 467/468/471/420,1. P. C. Police Station Kotwali District Etawah Sri S. S, Tiwari, Senior Counsel for the applicant and Sri V. C. Tiwari, Senior Counsel for the complainant have been heard at length and counter and rejoinder affidavits has been perused.

(2.) A preliminary objection has been raised by the learned counsel for the complainant thai the applicant is not in jail, hence the bail applications is not maintainable.

(3.) THE bail application may now be considered. THE applicant is the sole proprietor of business in the name and style of M/s. Laxmi Chamicals, 38, Jagpura, Etawah for manufacturing/preparing ABRIS (packing paper ). THE complainant State Bank of India, Etawah Main Branch granted three types of cash facilities to the applicant as follows : (1) Cash credit (Mandi type) to the limit of Rs. 8,00,000,00 ; (2) Cash credit (bills) to the limit of Rs. 30,00,000,00 ; (3) Medium term loan for Rs. 2,60,000 for purchase of a truck. Smt. Ram Pyari, Mother and Nawal Kishore Shukla, brother of the applicant who have been made co accused with the applicant, were guarantors of the aforesaid credit facility. THE procedure followed was that the complainant after sending manufactured goods to the purchaser firms, presented transport receipts bills of exchange and invoices before the complainant Bank on such presentation 75, percent of the amount covered by the bills, was to be credited to the account of the applicant. THE balance 25 percent of the payment of the amount of money relating to the goods entrusted to the transport agency and also hypothecated property to the tune of Rs. 70,00,000 to cover the risk of the complainant Bank. It has been further argued on behalf of the applicant that if the bank employees of the complainant Bank gave credit facility to the applicant to the tune of Rs. 40 lakhs and if the transport company committed breach of trust or criminal mis-appropriation of the goods for which the applicant has already given them notices the applicant should not be held responsible for the lapses in payment of money b cause he had been acting in good faith. It has also been argued on behalf of the applicant that a civil suit has been filed by the complainant Bank against the applicant and the alleged buyer firms who had failed to retire the documents as well as the transport agency and the dispute between the parties is of civil nature and therefore, also the applicant is entitled to bail.