Lali Devi v. The Union Of India Through The Director C.B.I., New Delhi

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.28811 of 2025 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-9 Year-2018 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Lali Devi W/o Late Manoj Kumar @ Late Manoj Paswan R/o VillagePurandarpur near Devi Asthan, P.S.- Jakkanpur, District- Patna ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

1.

The Union of India through the Director C.B.I., New Delhi New Delhi 2.

The DIG, C.B.I., Patna Bihar 3.

The Superintendent of Police, C.B.I., Patna Bihar ... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ajay Kumar Singh No. I (Advocate) For the CBI :

Mr. Kumar Priya Ranjan (Sr.Panel Counsel) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRABHAT KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 28-11-2025 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned Senior Panel Counsel for C.B.I.

2. The petitioner, who is lady, apprehends her arrest in Special Case No.01/2021 {RC No.09 (S)/2018} registered for the offence under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468 & 471 I.P.C. read with section 13(1) (a) of the Prevention of Corruption (P.C.) Act, 1988.

3. The informant, who is DGM/Zonal Manager, Corporation Bank, alleges that while co-accused Amrendra Kumar was posted as the Branch Manager, Corporation Bank, Raja Bazar Branch, Patna in connivance with the named accused persons has disbursed loan to the tune of Rs.788.50

2/4 lakhs during the period 2015-18. Further, alleges that 43 loans were sanctioned on the basis of forged and fabricated documents. It is next alleged that Rs.536.25 lakhs is outstanding against 43 loan accounts. It is also alleged that units of 42 borrowers out of the 43 borrowers were found non-existent but still an amount of Rs.766.50 lakhs were disbursed in their favour.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that from bare perusal of the allegation, as alleged in the FIR, it would manifest that there is allegation of disbursing loan based on forged and fabricated documents to non-existing entities. Petitioner is not named in the F.I.R. and during investigation, she has been made accused in this case on the basis of complaint filed by the bank manager alleging therein that two firms, namely M/s Auto Traders and M/s Auto Zone are fictitious firms, created by the blank loan documents and property documents to avail the loans. Learned counsel submits that petitioner had applied for loan of Rs. 4 lakhs and she also got Rs. 4 lakhs, however Rs. 40 lakhs is outstanding against her name, as named accused persons committed fraud and succeeded to withdraw huge amount in the name of this petitioner, for which, she (petitioner) lodged an F.I.R., vide

3/4 Shashtrinagar P.S. Case No. 195 of 2018 in which she has stated that the Bank Manager and other accused persons have cheated her. Similarly situated co-accused persons have already been granted bail, vide orders annexed as Annexures P/3, P/4, P/5, P/6, P/7 & P/8 to this petition.

5. Learned senior panel counsel for CBI vehemently opposes the prayer for anticipatory bail.

6. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances, in the event of arrest/surrender before the Court below within a period of eight weeks from today, let the above named petitioner be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail-bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Special Judge, C.B.I. - 1, Patna in connection with Special Case No. 01 of 2021, RC No. 09(S) of 2018, subject to condition as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Cr.P.C. / Section 482(2) of the B.N.S.S. with further following conditions:- (i) Petitioner shall co-operate into trial and shall be properly represented on each and every date fixed by the trial court and shall remain physically present as directed by the trial court and on her absence on two consecutive dates without sufficient reason, her bail bond shall be cancelled by the trial court.

4/4 (ii) If the petitioner is found tampering with the evidence or the witnesses in this case, the prosecution will be at liberty to move for cancellation of bail.

(iii) The petitioner shall surrender her Indian Passport before the trial court, if she is in possession of the same and without the permission of the trial court, she will not leave the State. (Prabhat Kumar Singh, J) anay U T