STATE TIMES NEWS
JAMMU: Justice Javed Iqbal Wani of Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court rejected the pre-arrest bail application of Ishvinder Singh Ranyal, the then Assistant Manager J&K Bank Branch Pouni who was allegedly involved in fraud lent withdrawal of Rs 1.26 crores from the dormant bank accounts.
Facts emanating from the record would reveal that the Branch Manager of J&K Bank Branch Pouni District Reasi filed a written application in Police Station Pouni District Reasi addressed to the respondent 2 herein requesting for registration of an FIR against the petitioner herein being Assistant Manager (under suspension) Code-013698 on the premise that during a surprise visit by the Vigilance Officer of the Bank on November 22, 2023 in Branch Pouni, unauthorized debit entries from the deceased/inactive/unclaimed accounts were found and upon in depth investigation, it was observed that the petitioner herein while working as Assistant Manager in the Branch Pouni have had made fraudulent debits in various deceased, unclaimed and inactive accounts existing in the said branch and transferred the credit proceeds in his own account No. 0612020990013698 (Employees’ CC Limit) and in Account No. 0544040100005912 of his wife, namely, Mrs. Satvinder Kour either directly or routed through Account No. 0845040100001476 of one Sher Mohd. and Account No. 0672040900006831 of one Narinder Kumar and some other accounts with total surfaced amount of Rs. 126.34 lacs, having withdrawn the said amount for his personal gains causing wrongful loss to the bank and its customers thereby having committed various offences punishable under the Indian Penal Code.
Justice Javed Iqbal Wani after hearing both the sides observed that prima facie there is a material on record connecting the petitioner herein with the commission of the alleged offence, which cannot be overlooked or ignored by this Court while dealing with the instant application and a general contention of the petitioner that the case foisted against him is false, frivolous and vexatious cannot per se discredit the case set up against the petitioner by the respondents herein. The role of the petitioner in the commission of the alleged offence in the facts and circumstances is required to be left open to be investigated by the investigating agency which is required to be given a free hand to investigate the case from all angles. It is significant to mention here that the provisions of Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, which provide for discretion for grant of bail to a person apprehending arrest is an extraordinary power vested in this Court and has to be exercised only in exceptional cases where it appears that the person may be falsely implicated or there are reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely otherwise to misuse his liberty. For the aforesaid reasons, this court is of the considered opinion that the petitioner is not entitled to the concession of bail in anticipation of his arrest for the alleged offence punishable under Section 409 of the Indian Penal Code at this stage.