IN THE HIGHCOURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI
B. A. No. 2041 of 2011
Shamsher Bahadur Singh Versus The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I.
with
B. A. No. 3035 of 2011
Nitya Das Versus The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I.
with
B. A. No. 3466 of 2011
Manoj Kumar Ram Versus The State of Jharkhand through C.B.I.
--------
CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE H. C. MISHRA
------
For the Petitioners : M/s P.K.Prasad, Sr. Advocate
& Debolina Sen, Adv. (in B.A. Bo. 2041/2011)
M/s R.S.Majumdar, Sr. Advocate
& Rajesh Kumar, Adv.(in B.A. Bo. 3035/2011)
M/s I. Sinha & Kumar Vimal, Advocates
(in B.A. Bo. 3466/2011)
For the C.B.I : Mr. Md. Mokhtar Khan, Advocate
------
4/ 14.07.2011
All these bails applications arise out of the same case and as such,
they are taken up together and disposed of by this common order.
Heard learned counsels for the petitioners and learned Spl.P.P. of
C.B.I.for the Prosecution.
The petitioners have been made accused for the offence under
Sections 409, 420 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code and Section 13(2) read
with Section 13 (1)(c) (d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, in connection
with R.C. Case No. 11A/05D.
The case was instituted on the basis of the written information
given by the Deputy General Manager, State Bank of India, Zonal Office,
Ranchi, to the Superintendent of Police, C.B.I. bringing to his knowledge that
there was a fraud of Rs. 1,25,47,950/- in State Bank of India, Dhanbad Branch,
Dhanbad, wherein, consignment of 58 boxes of soiled notes aggregating to Rs.
16.82 crores was sent to R.B.I.. The R.B.I. returned back the entire consignment
stating that large number of notes in higher denominations had been exchanged
in violation of the R.B.I. Notes Refund Rules, 1975. The petitioners were posted
at Cashiers in S.B.I. Dhandad Branch, Dhanbad and it is alleged that while they
were manning the notes exchange counter, they accepted the mutated notes in
violation of the Rules by abusing their official positions and there is direct
allegation against them to have accepted the mutated notes by accepting illegal
gratification for the same.
According to the charge sheet, the allegation against petitioner
Nitya Das is to have cheated the Branch to the tune of Rs. 48,14,100/- by way of
exchanging/inserting packets/bundles of GC notes in currency chest of S.B.I.,
Dhanbad branch containing Deliberate Cut Notes, Zero value notes and brown
papers. Similarly the allegation against petitioner Manoj Kumar Ram is to have
cheated S.B.I Dhanbad Branch to the tune of Rs. 5,12,900/- by way of
exchanging/inserting packets/bundles of GC notes in currency chest of SBI,
Dhanbad branch containing Deliberate Cute Notes, Zero Value notes and brown
papers. As regards the allegation against petitioner Shamsher Bahadur, there is
allegation of cheating S.B.I Dhanbad Branch to the tune of Rs. 16,16,600/- by
way of exchanging/inserting packets/bundles of GC notes in currency chest of
SBI, Dhanbad branch containing Deliberate Cut Notes, Zero Value notes and
brown papers.
Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. They have also submitted
that the petitioners were working as Cashiers and as per the Rules, other higher
officers were also required to put their signatures on the bundles, but those
persons have not been made accused in the present case. Learned counsel has
accordingly prayed for bail.
Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the CBI has drawn the
attention of this Court towards the charges levelled against these petitioners and
has submitted that there is direct allegation against them to have accepted the
mutated notes and zero value notes by accepting bribe for the same.
In the facts and circumstances of this case, taking into
consideration the gravity of charges against the petitioners, I am not inclined to
enlarge the petitioners, Shamsher Bahadur Singh, Nitya Das and Manoj Kumar
Ram on bail. Accordingly, their prayer for bail is rejected.
( H. C. Mishra, J.)
R.Kr.