SURINDER PAL SINGH Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the present application is rendered infructuous and the same be dismissed as such.

(2.) It is contended on behalf of the petitioner that he is a retired Bank officer as he obtained Voluntary Retirement on 30.04.2017 and during entire career of thirty four years, his services remained unblemished. It is further contended that he has secured the Bank interest by mortgaging the collateral of the loanees and the entire record pertaining to the loan transactions is available with the Bank and investigating officer is at liberty to obtain the same. It is also argued that the petitioner is a heart patient and he has undergone surgery. It is further contended that the petitioner has no control over the said record of the Bank after his retirement and he is ready to join the investigation, thus, his custodial interrogation is not required as the entire case of the prosecution is based on the documentary evidence.

(3.) On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant-Bank have opposed the contentions of learned Senior counsel for the petitioner on the premises that he has actively connived with the loanees as well as defrauded the Bank to the tune of more than Rs. One Crore i.e. Rs.1,10,18,314.73/- (One Crore, ten lakhs, eighteen thousand, three hundred fourteen and seventy three paise). It is further submitted that after registration of the FIR, the police has also added an offence under Section 409 IPC in the present case by way of a DDR entry as the petitioner has committed criminal breach of trust, being Chief Manager of the Bank, at the relevant time and his custodial interrogation is necessary to gather the true facts.