Saturday, December 28, 2024
154,225FansLike
654,155FollowersFollow
0SubscribersSubscribe

Allahabad High Court grants conditional bail to accused in multi-crore bank loan scam

The Allahabad High Court has granted conditional bail to Sachin Dutta, Director of Balaji High Tech Constructions Pvt Ltd, accused in the multi-crore bank loan scam.

A Single-Judge Bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta passed this order, while hearing a Criminal Miscellaneous Bail Application filed by Sachin Dutta.

As per the FIR, it was alleged that Balaji Hi-Tech Constructions Pvt Ltd constructed multi-storey residential flats under the name of Balaji Foster Heights in Ghaziabad. The said project was approved by Punjab National Bank, Ghaziabad for sanction of house loans.

It is alleged that the applicant, who was Director of Balaji Hi-Tech Constructions Pvt Ltd, in conspiracy and connivance with the accused allottees / borrowers, cheated the said bank fraudulently by taking house loan in the name of allottees/borrowers on the basis of forged and fictitious documents and as such caused loss to the complainant Bank.

It is further alleged that the applicant has in fact swindled a huge amount of money in conspiracy of other accused, who is alleged to have issued multiple allotment letters for a single flat to different individuals for enabling them to secure housing loans in the name of such allottees.

Also Read: PM Modi’s morphed photos: Allahabad HC directs Centre, Uttar Pradesh to prevent social media misuse

It is further alleged that the Bank officials agreed in principle to extend finance facilities to individuals, who wanted to purchase flats in the said project after evaluation of their financial and other credentials.

Counsel for the applicant submitted that as many as 32 FIRs have been lodged against the applicant and unknown officials of PNB and unknown persons. After lodging of the FIR, the investigation of the said case was handed over to CBI, who after conducting the investigation has submitted a charge sheet against the applicant on 30.12.2019. On the basis of said charge sheet, the applicant was arrested on 17.3.2020 and since then, he is in jail.

Counsel for the applicant further submitted that though cognizance on the said charge sheet has already been taken, order dated 02.01.2020 but till date, not a single witness has been examined.

Counsel for the applicant also submitted that in other similar cases, which have been registered against the applicant on almost identical allegations, the applicant has already been granted bail by the Court.

Counsel for applicant next submitted that other cases registered against the applicant, in which he has already been granted bail are absolutely on the same footings as that of the case and as such, he may be released on bail on the principle of parity.

Counsel for applicant said that the applicant is ready to cooperate in the process of trial by all means and will not misuse the liberty of bail and will cooperate in trial and as such, he may be released on bail in the case also.

Also Read: Malicious prosecution, the damage it wreaks and remedies

Counsel for CBI has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail and has submitted that the offence is serious in nature and therefore, the applicant may not be granted indulgence of bail.

He has relied upon the decision of Apex Court, reported in AIR 2013 SC 1933, Y.S Jagan Mohan Reddy Vs. C.B.I but could not dispute the fact that on almost identical / similar allegations, the applicant has already been granted bail and that trial of the case has not yet started and the applicant is languishing in jail since 17.3.2020 and that there is no likelihood to conclude trial in near future due to heavy dockets.

“Considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that the charge sheet in the case has already been filed on 30.12.2019, yet trial has not started. In other cases, in which identical and similar allegations have been made against the applicant, he has already been granted bail by the Court and the said orders have become final and has not been challenged in any court of law. Further, there is nothing on record to show that the applicant if released on bail will in any way adversely affect the conclusion of trial. He has been in jail since 17.3.2020, as such, in view of fact that he has already been enlarged on bail in other similar and identical cases, the applicant is entitled to be enlarged on bail”, the Court observed while allowing the bail application.

The Court ordered that,

Also Read: Supreme Court refuses to cancel board examination for Classes 10, 12 in physical mode, warns petitioner of exemplary costs on repetition of such PILs

Let the applicant, Sachin Dutta, involved in Special Case under Section 120-B r/w 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC and Substantive Offences thereof, Police Station CBI/ E.O.-1, New Delhi, District Ghaziabad be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned subject to the fulfillment of following conditions:-

  1. The applicant shall not tamper with the prosecution evidence by intimidating/ pressurizing the witnesses, during the investigation or trial.
  2. The applicant shall cooperate in the trial sincerely without seeking any adjournment.
  3. The applicant shall not indulge in any criminal activity or commission of any crime after being released on bail.
  4. The applicant shall remain present before the trial court on each date fixed, either personally or through his counsel. In case of his absence, without sufficient cause, the trial court may proceed against him under Section 229-A of the Indian Penal Code.
  5. In case, the applicant misuses the liberty of bail and in order to secure his presence proclamation under Section 82 Cr.P.C. is issued and the applicant fails to appear before the Court on the date fixed in such proclamation, then, the trial court shall initiate proceedings against him, in accordance with law, under Section 174-A of the Indian Penal Code.
  6. The applicant shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against him in accordance with law. In case of breach of any of the above conditions, it shall be a ground for cancellation of bail.
spot_img

News Update