JITENDER KUMAR Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners, in all the aforesaid petitions, have approached this Court for grant of anticipatory bail, under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'Cr.PC), in case FIR No.23 of 2021, dtd. 3/3/2021, registered under Ss. 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'IPC'), in Police Station East, Shimla.

(2.) Status Report stands filed, wherein it is stated that Shri Navin Kumar Patial, Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Panthaghati (Shimla), presented an application/ to the police, stating therein that on 8/12/2015, petitioners Jitender Verma and Sanjeev Kumar approached State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (now after merger, State Bank of India) and made a request for grant of Home Loan of Rs.15,00,000.00 for purchase of property, and that request of these petitioners was considered by the Bank and the Bank agreed to grant Home Loan on the terms and conditions as stipulated in the Sanction Letter. Thereafter, in order to secure the loan, these petitioners mortgaged their property and deposited original title document, i.e. Sale Deed, registered vide registration No.2698, vide which equitable mortgage has been created, and the bank sanctioned the land and asked these two petitioners to execute registered mortgage deed also, on which they deposited mortgage deed registered vide registration No.8890. When bank official visited the property, he found that the borrowers had sold all the flats in the property and same was confirmed by the Bank's Empanelled Advocate in his title investigation report that said sale deed was not found registered with sub Registrar, Shimla.

(3.) It is stated in the Status Report that the aforesaid two petitioners had also approached the aforesaid Bank, on 15/6/2015, and made a request/applied for grant of Home Loan of Rs.20,00,000.00 for completion/finishing of semi-finished house, which was sanctioned on the terms and conditions mentioned in the Sanction Letter, and for the purpose supplied and deposited mortgage deed registered in the office of Sub Registrar Theog, vide Registration No.479, but, on inquiry, the said mortgage deed was found to be forged and fabricated document.