AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
S.G. Chattopadhyay, J
[1] This application has been filed under section 439 Cr.P.C for granting bail to accused Manoj Kr. Meena who is an FIR named accused in Dharmanagar PS case No. 2020 DMN 0087 under sections 120B, 409, 468, 471, 420 and 403 IPC.
[2] The case was registered against him on the basis of the FIR lodged by Sri Dibyendu Chaudhury, AGM, State Bank of India with the officer in charge of Dharmanagar police station on 28.07.2020 wherein it was alleged that while the accused was posted in the clearing section of the Dharmangar branch of SBI as a customer assistant, he misappropriated an amount of Rs.4,33,38,933/- by transferring the said amount to various accounts of his relatives in different banks out of which a sum of Rs.2,26,89,966/- was recovered. The complainant has given a detailed statement in his FIR as to how the money was misappropriated and to which accounts the same was transferred by the accused. During investigation of the case, accused surrendered in court and he was put to jail.
[3] Heard Mr. Alik Das, counsel appearing for the accused. It is submitted by Mr. Das, counsel that accused is in custody for more than 82 days. Case against him is entirely false which has been manufactured by the higher officials of the bank to cover up their misdeeds. Moreover the case was lodged after the accused was transferred to Rajasthan. Counsel also submits from the allegations labeled against him, it cannot be said that he misappropriated the money for his personal gain. Counsel submits that considering his prolonged detention in custody and the facts and circumstances available on record, bail may be granted to the petitioner on any condition.
[4] Submission on behalf of the prosecution on the other hand is that a huge sum of money was misappropriated by the accused from the bank in which he was an employee. Accused has thereby committed criminal breach of trust. Amount involved is also huge. If he is released on bail at this stage of the investigation, it would be difficult to recover the rest amount of the public money defalcated by the petitioner. Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P, therefore, urges the court for rejecting his bail application. Counsel has also produced the voluminous case diary before this court.
[5] Perused the case diary. Considered the submissions of learned counsel representing the parties. FIR contains a detailed description as to how the offence was committed by the petitioner. The investigating agency has by this time collected the details of the accounts to which the accused transferred the defalcated amount for his personal gain. The amount allegedly defalcated by him exceeds four crores which is public money deposited in a nationalized bank.
[6] In view of the seriousness of the offence and the manner in which it was committed, this court is of the view that a full and fair investigation of the case is necessary. Release of the accused at this stage is very likely to obstruct the course of investigation.
[7] For the foregoing reasons, his bail application stands rejected and the case is disposed of. Return the case diary to Mr. R. Datta, learned P.P.