IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Original Jurisdiction Dated: Nainital: the 11th day of October, 2011 First Bail Application No. 822 of 2011 Criminal Side Manoj Kumar Gupta S/o Shri S.P. Gupta R/o 368, Sonali Puarm, Malakpur Roorkee, Hardwar, District Hardwar ……...Applicant ( in Jail) Versus Central Bureau of Investigation …..….Opposite Party Arising out of CBI case no. 2 of 2011 (FIR No. RC0072010A0001) Under Section: 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 IPC and section 13 (2) r/w section 13(1)(d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 Police Station CBI, SPE, Dehradun -________________________________________________________________ Hon’ble Prafulla C. Pant, J. Mr. Lalit Tiwari, Advocate, present for the applicant. Mr. Arvind Vashisth, Advocate, present for the CBI. Applicant- Manoj Kumar Gupta, who is in jail in connection with CBI case no. 2 of 2011 (FIR No. RC0072010A0001), relating to offences punishable under section 120B, 420, 467, 468, 471, 201 IPC and -2- one punishable under section 13 (2) r/w section 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988, Police Station CBI, SPE, Dehradun, has sought his release on bail. Heard learned counsel for the parties. It is a case of granting cash credit facility over ` 50 lac to one M/s Augurs Well E-Solution Ltd., by bank officers, without appropriate verification. Co- accused N.S. Mahipal, who was field officer has already been granted bail by the lower court. Other co-accused Sunil Goyal and Anil Gupta have also been granted bail. Applicant Manoj Kumar Gupta was a Manager (SME) of the Main Branch of SBI, Dehradun. It is pleaded on behalf of the applicant that there was no criminal intention on the part of the applicant in the transaction in question. In the above circumstances, without expressing any opinion as to final merits of the case, this Court is of the view that applicant deserves bail. Therefore, the bail application is allowed. Let the applicant Manoj Kumar Gupta be released on bail on executing personal bond, and furnishing two sureties each of the like amount to the satisfaction of court concerned. (Prafulla C. Pant, J.) Parul 11.10.2011