IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.52103 of 2008 FAKU MANDAL @ AKHILESH MANDAL, son of Late Jagdeo Mandal, village Lodipur, Akidattpur, PS Kharik, Naugachia, Dist. Bhagalpur .. Petitioner. Versus STATE OF BIHAR THRU.C.B.I. ----------- 3 6.2.2009 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the Standing counsel for the C.B.I. The petitioner is an accused in a case under sections 120B, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Penal Code and sections 7, 11, 12, 13(2) read with section 13(1)(a) and 13(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are three sets of accused persons, that is, those who are officers of the bank, persons who are proprietors of different firms and private accused such as the petitioner. It is submitted that petitioner is the Up- Pramukh and he was not named in the FIR. It is only after the investigation that his name transpired in this case. From a perusal of the charge sheet there are two allegations against the petitioner. First is that he was responsible for identifying thirty five loanees of village Lodipur and secondly that he had submitted some certificates saying that the borings were installed. Leaned counsel for the petitioner submits that the loan was for the purpose of buying pumps and the petitioner has been involved in this case by the Mukhiya due to political rivalry and that he has not given any certificate to the effect that tube wells have been installed. 2 Counsel for the C.B.I., on the other hand, submits that there are several persons who have been named as witnesses. On the whole the allegation is that loans were taken in the names of persons and misappropriated by the Bank Manager, the proprietor of various firms and this petitioner. The grounds raised on behalf of the petitioner may be good grounds for consideration for the purpose of regular bail. However, it is not a fit case in which anticipatory bail should be granted. This application is dismissed. haque (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)