Dhananjay Kumar Patal Chandra Ghosh v. The Union Of India, Through Director, Central Bureau Of Investigation, New Delhi.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.34521 of 2021 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-4 Year-2015 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== DHANANJAY KUMAR PATAL CHANDRA GHOSH Son of Late Patal Chandra Ghosh Resident of Flat No.-D2. Nishant Sindhu, Bibhuti Tower, Bari Khanjarpur, Police Station - Barari, District - Bhagalpur. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India, through Director, Central Bureau of Investigation, New Delhi.

2.

The Superintendent of Police, CBI, ACB, Patna. Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr.Amarendra Kumar, Advocate For the CBI :

Mr.Avanish Kumar Singh, Advocate ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 08-09-2022 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the CBI. Petitioner apprehends arrest in registered for the offences punishable under Section 120(B), 419, 420, 468, 471 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2), 13(1)(d) of the P. C. Act.

Petitioner, in the capacity of Branch Manager, in collusion with other accused persons got sanctioned and disbursed loan amounting to Rs. 495.32 lacs to 534 account holders on the basis of forged and fabricated land possession certificate.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in this case. Petitioner was

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34521 of 2021(13) dt.08-09-2022 2/3 not named in the FIR rather his name surfaced in the case in course of confessional statement of the co-accused given during course of investigation. For that same and similar occurrence on other FIR being Sanokhar Police Station Case No. 81 of 2014 was lodged in which he has already been granted bail by a bench of this Court vide order dated 14.09.2015 (Annexure 2) after remaining in custody for some period. Petitioner being Branch Manager has no mechanism to verify genuineness of documents which is required for grant of loan. It is also the submission of the petitioner that petitioner was Branch Manager during 29.05.2014 to 28.08.2014, whereas, transaction in question is of 29.05.2012 to 13.06.2014.

Learned counsel for the CBI opposes the prayer for bail submitting that there is specific allegation against the petitioner that he in collusion with other accused persons got sanctioned and disbursed loan amounting to Rs. 495.32 lacs to 534 account holders on the basis of forged and fabricated land possession certificate. It is further submitted that despite issuance of summons the petitioner did not appear before the Court below since filing of the chargesheet five years back. Considering the aforesaid facts as well as conduct of the petitioner evading the process of Court, his prayer for bail is

Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.34521 of 2021(13) dt.08-09-2022 3/3 refused with direction to surrender and seek regular bail which would be considered and disposed of on its own merit without prejudice.

(Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) shashi/- U T