9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (8) TMI 945X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng that the petitioner being the Managing Partner of M/s. Bhanu Construction entered into a criminal conspiracy with the co-accused Deputy Manager of State Bank of India, Hatia Branch and consequently the Bank transferred Rs.100,01,41,016/- belonging to "Jharkhand Rajya Madhyan Bhojan Pradhikaran" to the bank account of the said M/s. Bhanu Construction and consequently the petitioner utilized/transferred/ misappropriated the amount of Rs.52,36,03,016/- out of the said transferred amount till 19.09.2017- which is the date of detection of the said fraud and there is further allegation that on 28.09.2018, the said State Bank of India, Hatia Branch was able to recover an amount of Rs.35,95,27,344/- out of the transferred amount of Rs.52,36,03,016/- from M/s. Bhanu Construction and the outstanding amount as it stood on 11.07.2018 was Rs..16,40,76,059/- plus interest of Rs.3,19,41,398/- that is in total Rs.19,60,17,457/-. It is further submitted by learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner was under the bona fide impression that an amount of Rs.50,00,00,000/- has been sent to the said account with State Bank of India in connection with a business transactio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ner. It is next submitted by Mr. Anil Kumar that on 30.01.2019 a proposal was made by the petitioner for full and final payment of the fund in the account of M/s. Bhanu Construction erroneously transferred by the State Bank of India. It is next submitted by learned Senior Advocate appearing for the appellant that C.B.I. in the meantime has submitted charge sheet. It is then submitted that on 20.08.2019, the Assistant General Manager, State Bank of India, Hatia Branch has issued a letter to M/s. Bhanu Construction of which the petitioner being the only partner, intimating that the said bank accepted compromise proposal dated 06.03.2019. It is also submitted by learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that the petitioner being the partner of M/s. Bhanu Construction filed anticipatory bail application vide A.B.A. No.6218 of 2019 before this Court and considering the facts of the case, this Court was pleased to give the privilege of anticipatory bail to the petitioner provisionally with the condition that in case the of the petitioner being arrested or surrendering in the Court of Special Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi by 17th October, 2019 he will be enlarged on bail provisionally ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion of the case. Indisputably, the investigation is still in progress. The appellants will have to explain their position to the investigating agency and after investigation is complete, the matter can proceed further depending on the material gathered during the investigation. The suspicion entertained by the investigating agency as to how the appellants appropriated huge funds, which in fact were meant to be disbursed to the unfortunate victims of 2002 riots will have to be explained by the appellants. Further, once the investigation is complete and police report is submitted to the court concerned, it would be open to the appellants to apply for defreezing of the bank accounts and persuade the court concerned that the said bank accounts are no more necessary for the purpose of investigation, as provided in sub-section (3) of Section 102 of the Code. It will be open to the court concerned to consider that request in accordance with law after hearing the investigating agency, including to impose conditions as may be warranted in the fact situation of the case." (Emphasis Supplied) Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner also relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oad sense, therefore, the Court exercises an overall control on the actions of the police officers in every case where it has taken cognizance." (Emphasis Supplied) Learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner next relied upon the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in the case of M.T. Enrica Lexie and Anr. v. Doramma and Ors. reported in (2012) 6 SCC 760, paragraph 14 of which reads as under:- "14. The police officer in course of investigation can seize any property under Section 102 if such property is alleged to be stolen or is suspected to be stolen or is the object of the crime under investigation or has direct link with the commission of offence for which the police officer is investigating into. A property not suspected of commission of the offence which is being investigated into by the police officer cannot be seized. Under Section 102 of the Code, the police officer can seize such property which is covered by Section 102(1) and no other." Hence, it is submitted by Mr. Anil Kumar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner that the order dated 24.09.2019 passed by the Special Judge, C.B.I., Ranchi be set aside and the C.B.I. be directed to d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
