Case Facts:
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Miscellaneous No.14615 of 2012 ====================================================== Padmanand Singh Azad .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The Union Of India Through S.P .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.16015 of 2012 ====================================================== Shiv Shankar Kumar Prasad Singh .... .... Petitioner/s Versus Central Bureau Of Investigatio .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== with Criminal Miscellaneous No.16312 of 2012 ====================================================== Ram Adhar Thakur .... .... Petitioner/s Versus The State Of Bihar Through C.B .... .... Opposite Party/s ====================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE DINESH KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER 3 25-04-2012 Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and the C.B.I. The petitioners being the Regional Manager, Head Cashier and the Clerk of the Central Bank of India are apprehending arrest in a case registered for the offences punishable under [STATUTE] and Section 13(2), 13(1) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It is alleged that the Regional Manager, Branch Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14615 of 2012 (3) dt.25-04-2012 2/5 Manager, Cashier, Clerk of Central Bank of India, particularly Amwara Chowk Branch entered into criminal conspiracy with other accused persons namely Rajesh Kumar Singh, Jitesh Kumar Singh, Ram Pravesh Rai and Rakesh Kumar Singh and thereby dishonestly sanctioned loan/over draft facility and Bank Guarantees on the basis of fake documents thereby causing loss to the tune of Rs. 11,87,70,415/- to the bank. It is alleged against petitioner Padmanand Singh Azad being the Regional Manager that he was unable to supervise the Amwara Chowk Branch as a result the illegality were committed and on his oral directions the commissions were not charged and illegality were sought to be regularized subsequently. It is submitted by learned Sr. counsel appearing on behalf of Padmanand Singh Azad that the petitioner Padmanand Singh Azad was the regional manager and as soon as he knew about the illegality, he took action and action taken by him has been acknowledged by the Head Office which get reflected from Annexure-2 and 3 and the Head Office found that prima facie this petitioner was not involved hence no action was directed against this petitioner whereas this petitioner was directed by Head Office to take action against these petitioners, moreover this petitioner retired from service Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14615 of 2012 (3) dt.25-04-2012 3/5 on 30.06.2011. It is alleged against Ram Adhar Thakur being the head cashier of the alleged branch of the bank that he made the payment on cheque without having signature of the drawer and subsequently the cheques were signed by the drawer after issuance of the draft. It is submitted on behalf of Ram Adhar Thakur that the accusations are presumptive as it is not possible to make payment or issue draft without signature of drawer on the cheque. Moreover the petitioner has been proceeded departmentally when the punishment has been inflicted against him and he has retired from service in August, 2011. It is alleged against Shiv Shankar Kumar Prasad Singh being the clerk of the said branch that this petitioner also allowed the cheques to be cleared without the signature of the drawer and no commission was taken on the draft issued in favour of the accused persons. It is submitted on behalf of Shiv Shankar Kumar Prasad Singh that the petitioner was simply clerk and he has no authority to sanction the loan or draft facility and he was not authorized for making an order for not taking commission. It is further submitted that the proceeding was also initiated against Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14615 of 2012 (3) dt.25-04-2012 4/5 this petitioner and punishment has been inflicted and he has been transferred from the bank in question though he is still in service. It is submitted by Mr. Bipin Kumar Sinha, learned counsel for the C.B.I. that under the criminal conspiracy, the wrongful gain to the tune of Rs. 11,87,70, 415/- were made to the petitioners and other accused persons who are not the bank officials and corresponding loss has been caused to the bank but admits that the charge sheet has been submitted. Considering the fact that the investigation is complete, the actual beneficiaries are the businessmen in whose favour the drafts and other loan/over draft facilities were sanctioned, two petitioners have already retired and petitioners undertake to appear regularly during trial, let the above named petitioners be released on anticipatory bail, in the event of arrest or surrender before the learned Court below within a period of 12 weeks from today, on furnishing bail bond of Rs. 10,000/- (ten thousand) each with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of the learned Special Judge, C.B.I.-I, Patna in connection with R.C. Case No. 10A/2010 Special Case No. 07 of 2011 (5/10-Old), subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C. Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.14615 of 2012 (3) dt.25-04-2012 5/5 The C.B.I. will be at liberty to file application for cancellation of bail of the petitioners if they default for three consecutive occasions during trial. Amrendra/- (Dinesh Kumar Singh, J)

Applicable IPC Section: 406

Statute Text:
Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code. Criminal breach of trust. Whoever commits criminal breach of trust shall be punished with imprisonment of either description for a term which may extend to three years, or with fine, or with both.