Gamathy Sathish vs State

T.V.Thamilselvi, J

The petitioner, who was arrested and remanded to judicial custody on 23.11.2022 for the alleged offences punishable under Sections 120B, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 I.P.C., in Crime No.227 of 2022 on the file of the respondent police, seeks bail.

The case of prosecution is that A1 had approached the defacto complainant bank and introduced himself as Proprietor of M/s.Sri Sai Pressing, situated at Ambattur Industrial Estate, Chennai, for which he submitted to applications for availing housing loan on 29.03.2018 for the Duplex Villas situated at Plot No.12, and 33, Park City, Phase-II, Padappai, by submitting fabricated audited balance sheet for the assessment year 2015-2016, 2016-2017 and 2017-2018. Accordingly, A1 colluding with other accused availed two housing term loans to the tune of Rs.99,38,000/-and the borrower had not even paid single EMI from the date of obtaining loan and cheated the complainant bank. Hence, the complaint.

The learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that he is a staff of A1 company and he is no way connected with the offence and he has not at all committed any offence as alleged by the respondent police. He would submit that after verification of documents by the then manager, the loan was sanctioned, but he was not arrayed as accused. He would also submit that the name of petitioner was not found in the F.I.R. nor any allegation reveals against him, but the prosecution reveals that from the borrowal loan amount, a sum of Rs.25 lakhs was transferred to the account of this petitioner. He would submit that only a sum of Rs.3,50,000/- was paid, which is the salary amount to be paid during Covid period. He would further submit that the investigation is almost completed and that the petitioner has been suffering incarceration for more than 21 days from 23.11.2022. On instruction, he would further submit that without prejudice to his right and contentions, he is prepared to deposit/pay some considerable amount. Accordingly, he prayed to grant bail to the petitioner.

The learned Government Advocate (Crl. Side) appearing for respondent would submit that A1 is a builder and A2 is a purchaser and the petitioner is an employee, who is arrayed as A4. He along with one Lakshmi Narayanan forged the documents for getting loan from the bank, for which, the petitioner has received Rs.3.5 lakhs, thereby he has played main role for creating forged documents. He would submit that A2 alone is absconding and A1 and A3 were arrested. He would submit that on giving false particulars, they have obtained a loan of Rs.49.68 lakhs from the defacto complainant bank. He would submit that based on the report, the said borrower Mr.Vasu colluded with builder and cheated the bank and other income related documents, which were not verified by then manager and he has also colluded with them. Thus, the investigation reveals that the petitioner has received a sum of Rs.25 lakhs through his account, which is a public money. He would submit that the investigation is almost completed and if he is released on bail, he would hamper the investigation and tamper the witnesses Hence, he strongly opposed to grant bail to the petitioner.

Considering the fact that the investigation is almost completed, the amount was also secured, and also considering the period of incarceration undergone by the petitioner, this Court is inclined to grant bail to the petitioner with certain conditions.

Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to deposit a sum of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees five lakhs only) into the credit of Crime No. 227 of 2022 within a period of two weeks from the date of receipt of copy of this order and on such deposit, the petitioner is ordered to be released on bail on his executing bond for a sum of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten Thousand only) with two sureties, each for a like sum to the satisfaction of the learned CCB & CBCID Special Court, Egmore, Chennai, and on further conditions that:

(a) the sureties shall affix their photographs and left thumb impression in the surety bond and the Magistrate may obtain a copy of their Aadhar card or Bank pass Book to ensure their identity;

(b) the petitioner shall appear before the respondent police on every Tuesday and Sunday at 10.30 a.m. for the period of four months and also he shall appear before the trial court regularly without fail.

(c) the defacto complainant Bank is permitted to withdraw the deposit amount of Rs.5,00,000/- (Rupees Five Lakhs Only) on proper identification and acknowledgment.

(d) the petitioner shall not tamper with evidence or witness either during investigation or trial;

(e) the petitioner shall not abscond either during investigation or trial;

(f) on breach of any of the aforesaid conditions, the learned Magistrate/ Trial Court is entitled to take appropriate action against the petitioners in accordance with law as if the conditions have been imposed and the petitioners released on bail by the learned Magistrate/Trial Court himself as laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in P.K.Shaji Vs. State of Kerala [(2005) AIR SCW 5560]; and;

(g) if the accused thereafter absconds, a fresh FIR can be registered under Section 229-A IPC.