MAJOR SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a first petition under Sec. 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dtd. 26/9/2021 under Ss. 409, 465, 467, 468, 471 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station Chhajali, District Sangrur.

(2.) Brief facts of the prosecution case are that Palwinder Singh was working as Branch Manager and the petitioner was working as a Cashier in The Sangrur Central Cooperative Bank Branch, Chhajli and during that period it was stated that the two of them in collusion with each other had embezzled to the tune of Rs.17,96,570.00. In the inquiry which had been marked by the Senior Superintendent of Police to the Deputy Superintendent of Police, Sub-Division, it was prima facie found that the petitioner along with the said Palwinder Singh had embezzled the said money during the period ranging from 2017 to 2019 when the petitioner as well as the said Palwinder Singh were posted in the Branch as Cashier and Branch Manager, respectively. It was found that an amount of Rs.3,51,700.00 had been embezzled by making unauthorized withdrawal from saving/pension accounts, Rs.13,84,000.00 had been embezzled from Short Term Loan Account by misusing powers and Rs.60,870.00 had been embezzled by issuing cheque books to Short Term Members without taking stationary charge and the said embezzlement was made in saving/pension accounts by forging the signatures/thumb impressions of account holders and it was found that signatures of some account holders did not match with specific signatures and in some cases even the account holder had died prior to the payment having been made. In the inquiry, it was also recorded that in fact the petitioner and the said Branch Manager had even admitted and they had together returned Rs.7,72,870.00 out of the total embezzled amount of Rs.17,96,570.00.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner was only a Cashier and he was duty bound to follow the instructions of the Branch Manager and, thus, the petitioner could not be held liable. It is further argued that an amount of Rs.7,72,870.00 has already been recovered and the petitioner is ready to join the investigation.