NAND KUMAR BANHANI S/O. LATE SHRI ARJUNDAS, AGED 51 YEARS, OCCUPATION: SERVICE, R/O. 115, INDRAPURI COLONY, BHANWERKUAN, INDORE Vs. STATE OF M.P. THROUGH P.S. KOTWALI, MHOW, DISTT. INDORE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THESE bunch of applications are taken up together and this common order shall govern all the cases. By this application filed under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. the applicants Nand Kumar Banhani, Rajendra Prasad Mishra, Abdul Moid Khan, Usha, Mohd. Akhtar Majal Khan & Rajesh Kumar Prajapati have moved the application for grant of anticipatory bail being implicated in Criminal Case No. 476/2011 registered by police station Kotwali, Mhow, Distt. Indore for offence under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 & 120(B)/ 34 of the IPC.

(2.) COUNSEL for the applicants have vehemently urged the fact that all the applicants are on various positions in the service of Central Bank of India at Mhow and report was lodged by the then Manager Shri Prasant Kumar Jain at Police Station Kotwali, Mhow that one Mr. Rajesh Neem an accountant in the said Bank, had transferred from N.B.O. A/c of Bank a sum of Rs.5 Crores in the name of his wife Anjana Neem and nephew Mukesh Neem and himself. The said transfer took place beginning from the year 2008. On an investigation being made, it was alleged that between the month of November, 2008 and May 2011, accused Rajesh Neem somehow procured the passwords the present applicants or hacked them in an unauthorised manner and from several accounts of the Bank transferred the money to his name and that of his wife and nephew from the accounts in the same Bank. The alleged act continued up to 19.05.2011 and thereafter the aforesaid report was filed by Shri Prasant Kumar Jain. The police registered a case under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 120(B)/ 34 of the IPC read with Section 4 of the Money Laundering Act and Section 66 of the B.D.E.I.T. Act, 2000 only against Rajesh Neem, Anjna Neem and Mukesh Neem. Thereafter the police also filed the charge -sheet against the present applicants and hence the present application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C.

(3.) COUNSEL further submitted that the complainant P.K. Jain himself had also been made an accused and has also got bail from the Court and under the circumstances, the applicants are also entitled to the same. More importantly, Counsel submitted that co -accused Prasant Kumar Jain and Anil Limya have got anticipatory bail in M. Cr.C. No. 4584/12 & 5155/12 under the identical set of circumstances and on the grounds of parity also, the applicants were entitled to the same.