Criminal Case No. 64859 of 2021 · Madhya Pradesh High Court · 2022

(BY SHRI MADHUR SHUKLA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT-EOW ) SHRI PRADEEP KUMAR HAZARI, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE OBJECTOR. (Heard through Video Conferencing) This M.Cr.C. coming on for admission this day, the court passed the following: Heard with the aid of case diary. ORDER This is the first application under Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail. Applicant Neelam Warkhede apprehends her arrest in connection with Crime No.86/2021, registered at Police Station EOW, District Bhopal for the offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and Section 7(c), 13(1)(a), 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act. According to the prosecution story, co-accused Mrs. Deepti William, proprietor Alia Creation, had applied for a loan from Bank of Maharashtra Main Branch, Wright Town, Jabalpur, under Mukhyamantri Yuva Udyami Signature Not Verified SAN Yojana, to set up the textile industry through District Industries and Trade 2 Centre, on 4/10/2018. Her application for a loan after approval from the District Industries Centre was received in Bank of Maharashtra. Along with the loan application, a quotation of M/s Ahmed enterprises to purchase the Jhuggi Machine Automatic Grade Model F -5, 2100 (Sewing Machine) Price Rs. 215000/- per Machine Total amount Rs. 612000 was also submitted by co-accused Mrs. Deepti William. In that quotation the GST number 23875188, mobile number 9309071557 and address Basti No.2, Ramnagar Amkhera Road Gohalpur, Jabalpur of the firm Ahmed Enterprises was mentioned. The then bank manager co-accused Bhushan Shukla after verifying the documents submitted by co-accused Mrs. Deepti William, proprietor Alia Creation and after inspection of the site gave a verification report and sanctioned the loan of Rs.56.25 Lakhs for purchasing the Sewing Machine and cash credit limit of 1800000 to run the business. After sanctioning of the loan as per the quotation submitted by co-accused Mrs. Deepti William Rs.71,04,000 and Rs.5,08,000 on were deposited in the bank account of the supplier M/s Ahmed Enterprises through RTGS on 18/10/2018 and on 06/11/2018 respectively. Thereafter co-accused Bhushan Shukla again visited the site of firm M/s. Alia Creation on 16/10/2018 and 06/11/2018 and gave the inspection reports to the effect that machines have b een installed. Later, due to non-payment of loan installments by Mrs. Williams, the loan account became NPA. On 07/07/2021, Vijay Kumar Singh Chief Manager Bank of Maharashtra Main Branch Jabalpur and Dhanendra Kumar Srivastava Manager Bank of Maharashtra Main Branch Jabalpur visited the factory of firm Alia Enterprises. On physical verification, it was learnt that there were 18 sewing machines of Jack F4 model and one Interlocking machine worth only Rs.50,000/. Co-accused Deepti William took the loan on the basis of forged documents and embezzled the loan amount. O n this Vijay Kumar Singh lodged a written report at EOW Jabalpur, whereupon Crime no. 86/2021 for the offences punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B of IPC and Section 7(c), 13(1)(a), 13(2) of Signature Not Verified SAN Prevention of Corruption Act was registered. 3 During the investigation of the crime, it was found that Jhuggi Machine Automatic Grade Model F -5, 2100 (Sewing Machine) Priced at Rs. 2,15,000/- per Machine for which quotations were filed before the bank, were not installed in the factory and instead 18 sewing machines of Jack F4 model and one Interlocking machine worth only Rs.50,000/- were installed. Co- accused Bhushan Shukla gave a wrong verification report regarding the installation of Sewing Machines. On contacting the original owner of M/s Ahmed Enterprises, it was learnt that no quotation was issued by him for the supply of the machines, nor did he supply the machines; the quotation submitted in his name was fake. He has not been paid any amount. The account number mentioned in the quotation does not belong to Ahmed Enterprises. It was also found that Fake Gumasta certificate, Labor Department certificate and electricity bills were prepared by co-accused Ravi Satpal, on the basis of which co-accused Shailendra Singh Thakur opened an account in Bank of Baroda erstwhile Vijaya Bank in the name of firm M/s. Ahmed Enterprises in which the loan amount of Alia Creation was transferred and from that account a sum of Rs.10,55,000/- was transferred in the account of co-accused Umesh Chourasiay on 20.10.2018 and Rs.4,25,000/- was received by the co-accused Shailendra Singh Thakur as cash. From the account of M/s. Ahmed Enterprises Rs.1,10,000/-was transferred to the account of co-accused Shilpi Mishra and Rs.5,08,000/- into the account of applicant Neelam Barkade sister of co-accused Deepti William. Thus applicant in connivance with other co-accused persons embezzled the loan amount and caused loss to the bank to the tune of Rs.95,95,000/-. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant is innocent and has falsely been implicated in the aforesaid offence. There is no evidence against the applicant to show that applicant is involved in the crime. The only allegation against the applicant is that applicant received Rs.5,08,000/- from Signature Not Verified SAN 4 the loan amount. Applicant is ready to deposit that amount under protest. Applicant is a lady. She has no criminal past. Applicant is ready to cooperate in the investigation and trial. In the event of arrest, her reputation will be ruined. Under these circumstances, applicant prays for grant of anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the respondent/EOW as well as objector opposed the prayer and submitted that applicant is the beneficiary of that loan amount and she received Rs.5,08,000/- from the loan amount and involved in the crime and in this regard investigation is going on. So, she should not be released on anticipatory bail. It is alleged that applicant received Rs.5,08,000/- from the loan amount and that amount was transferred by co-accused Shailendra Singh Thakur from the account of M/s. Ahmad Enterprises to the account of applicant, which prima facie show the involvement of the applicant in the crime and in this regard investigation is going on. So, looking to the facts and circumstance of the case and enormity of fraud, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the applicant. Hence, M.Cr.C. is rejected. (RAJEEV KUMAR DUBEY) JUDGE Signature Not Verified Signature Not Verified SAN SAN