Anupam Anshu v. The Central Bureau Of Investigation Through Deputy Superintendent Of Police, A. C. B., Patna

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

Criminal Miscellaneous No.54922 of 2017 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-8 Year-2017 Thana- C.B.I CASE District- Patna ====================================================== Anupam Anshu S/o Sri Prabhat Dwivedi, R/o 303, Anand Palace, Boring Patliputra, P.S.- Patliputra Colony, District- Patna. ... ... Petitioner/s

Versus

The Central Bureau of Investigation Through Deputy Superintendent of Police, A. C. B., Patna.

... ... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s :

Mr. Ashish Giri For the Opposite Party/s :

Mr. BIPIN KUMAR SINHA (SC,CBI) ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY PRIYA ORAL ORDER 24-01-2018 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner apprehends his arrest in Special Case No. 6 of 2017 instituted for the offence under Sections 120(B), 420, 467, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code.

It is alleged that suspect no.2 who was the Assistant Branch Manager of Indian Overseas Bank along with petitioner no.1 had sanctioned loan to suspect no. 3 to 27 and suspect no. 28 to 32 are suppliers and suspect no.33 is the person involved in diversion of funds from suspect no.9 and suspect no.20. On inquiry, it was found that the petitioner in collusion with those suspects has caused a huge loss to the Bank in question. During the inquiry it has also come that the amount has been transferred in the account of the petitioner with respect to suspect no.9 and suspect no.30. The informant has alleged that due to such illegal act petitioner has caused wrongful loss of Rs. 378.77 lacs to the Bank. The petitioner has given explanation of the amount

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.54922 of 2017(3) dt.24-01-2018 2/2 transferred in his account as mentioned in para 32 and 35 of the case diary. But the fact remains that amount with respect to suspect no. 9 and 30, has been transferred in the account of petitioner.

Keeping in view the fact that petitioner being the Assistant Branch Manager was responsible along with suspect no.1, Branch Manager, for sanction of loan, without proper verification of account, on account of which the loan amount turned NPA, causing huge loss to the Bank, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Prayer for bail is rejected.

The petitioner may surrender in the court below and make prayer for regular bail which shall be considered by the court below in accordance with law without being prejudiced by this order.

(Sanjay Priya, J) HR/- U T