IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.20521 of 2008 SWARAJ KUMAR SINHA Versus THE UNION OF INDIA THR0UGH CBI, PATNA ----------- 6. 1.9.2008 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Central Bureau of Investigation. The petitioner is apprehending his arrest in connection with RC Case No.17(A)/2006 arising out of Special Case No.14 of 2006 for the alleged offences registered under sections 120B, 409, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code and section 13(2) read with section 13(1)(c)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act. It is submitted on behalf of the petitioner that at the material time the petitioner was Deputy Manager (Accounts) in the State Bank of India and one V.K. Jha was officiating Branch Manager and A.K. Sinha was the Deputy Manager of the said Bank. The allegations are to the effect that all the above named persons in conspiracy fraudulently manipulated the relevant registers of the Bank pertaining to the educational loan, Savings Bank account, branch clearing general account and thereby made false debit entries and the corresponding entries into the personal loan account and educational loan acc0unt. The CBI after investigation submitted charge sheet in which the charge relating to the branch clearing was dropped. However, the chargesheets were submitted with regard to the other 2 allegations i.e., credit in the non-existent accounts and debiting the inoperative Savings Bank account. Learned counsel submits that the charge sheet has been submitted. However, the CBI did not properly investigate the same; for example, the allegations of alleged non-existent accounts are factually incorrect whereas those accounts are still exist as would be appearing from the statements of accounts of concerned persons annexed as Annexure 2 series. It has further been submitted that the petitioner was not the named accused. Learned counsel for the CBI, on the other hand, submits that this petitioner along with the aforementioned two officials in conspiracy made fraudulent adjustment of several educational and personal loan accounts by making the fake debit entries to the inoperative Savings Bank accounts and crediting the loan accounts. It is further submitted that upon investigation, it was found that the petitioner along with the co- accused made fraudulent entries using loan account with several persons and since there is materials against this petitioner, he is not entitled to the grant of anticipatory bail. It has further been submitted that the co-accused V.K. Jha is in custody whose regular bail application was rejected by this Court and the regular bail application of co-accused Ashok Kumar Sinha, who was Deputy Manager, was twice rejected. However, later he was allowed bail by the Apex Court as per the order dated 18th of July, 2008 passed in SLP (Criminal) No.2835 of 2008 and analogous cases. Learned counsel 3 submits that considering the facts that the charge sheet has already been filed and the said Ashok Kumar Sinha was in custody for more than one year, the petitioner is not entitled to be allowed anticipatory bail. Considering the submissions of the parties and on consideration of the materials on record and the materials which have been brought during the investigation as appearing in the chargesheet, I am not inclined to allow this application. Accordingly, the prayer for anticipatory bail made on behalf of the petitioner is rejected. It is, however, made clear that in case the petitioner surrenders and an application for regular bail is filed in the court below, the same shall be considered on its own merits without being prejudiced by the present order. PNM (Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)