Telangana High Court
CRLP/16089/2014 of Yadava Sampath Kumar, Vs State of A.P., on 30 December 2014
SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR CRIMINAL PETITION No.16089 of 2014 ORDER : The petitioner/A2, filed the present application under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking release in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.133 of 2013 of Gudivada II Town Police Station, Krishna District,
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C. PRAVEEN KUMAR
CRIMINAL PETITION No.16089 of 2014
Citations and Judicial Treatment
Cited by
0
Decisions in the index citing it
Cites
0
Decisions referred to
In this index
0
Of the decisions it cites
Overruled / Questioned
0
No negative treatment found
Loading the citing and cited decisions…
This judgment in the centre: on the left the decisions it cites, on the right the decisions citing it. Colour is the treatment; choose a decision to open it.
ORDER:
The petitioner/A2, filed the present application under Section 438Cr.P.C. seeking release in the event of his arrest in connection with CrimeNo.133 of 2013 of Gudivada II Town Police Station, Krishna District,registered for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 408, 468r/w 34 I.P.C.
2. The Area Manager, Fed Bank Financial Service Ltd., lodged areport stating that after taking over charge of the Branch, he found thefraud and misappropriation done by the Ex-Staff. On his request, an auditwas conducted and found that the petitioner has committed offence ofcriminal breach of trust, cheating, forgery, falsification of KYC documentsand fraud in 49 pledges to a tune of Rs.40, 35,970/-. The main businessof the Branch is to grant loans against the security of gold ornaments tothe genuine customers under various loan schemes. The loan againstsecurity of gold jewellery was provided to the needy customers aftercollection of documents as per ‘Know Your Customer(KYC)’ guidelinesand after checking the purity of gold by doing valuation of the goldornaments through internal appraiser and External Valuator appointed bythe Company. Based on the valuation report submitted by the internalappraiser as well as from the external valuer empanelled with thecompany and also on the basis of credit appraisal memo verified andsigned by the Branch Manager, the loans are disbursed to the customersas per the terms and conditions mentioned in the loan application form. Ifthe loan amount is high, the Branch Manager was required to visit thecustomer’s residence/business premises and verify the creditworthiness/background through neighbours. The Branch Manager shouldalso seek approval from Higher Authority of the Bank before disbursinghigh value loans. All the Branch staff colluded with the customers and arealleged to have granted loans against the spurious and low quality goldornaments from time to time. Basing on these allegations, the above report came to be lodged.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that even accepting theallegations in the report to be true, no offence is made against theaccused. He further submits that A1, A3 and A4 were already released onbail and hence the request of the petitioner can be considered.
4. The learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the respondent-Stateopposed the petition contending that the petitioner has misappropriatedthe funds to a tune of Rs.40 lakhs by granting loans against the spuriousand low quality gold ornaments.
5. A perusal of the case diary placed before the Court and also thereport lodged by the Bank Manager clearly disclose that the petitionerplayed an active role in advancing 49 loans by pledging spurious goldornaments. Merely because A1, A3 and A4 were released on bail, A2cannot be granted anticipatory bail, since the act of the petitioner causedsubstantial loss to the bank and the role of petitioner is specifically speltout in the case diary. Hence, the request of the petitioner is rejected.
6. Accordingly, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
___________________
C. PRAVEEN KUMAR, J
30[th] December, 2014pabpab