Decided on August 07,2019

Ajoy Das Appellant


Arindam Lodh, j. - (1.)Heard Mr. S. Sarkar, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner as well as Mr. Ratan Datta, learned PP appearing for the State-respondent.
(2.)The accused petitioner has filed the application under section 438 Cr.P.C. to grant him anticipatory bail in connection with Teliamura PS case No. 32 of 2019 under sections 409/406/420/34 of the IPC.
Mr. Sarkar, learned counsel has submitted that the petitioner is an employee of ICICI Bank and one Piklu Ghosh, is the informant of the case. Said Piklu Ghosh had approached Tripura OBC Co-operative Development Corporation Ltd., Lake Chowmuhani, Agartala for granting some loan under Ujjiban Small Finance scheme from the said Corporation. After completion of due procedure, the said Corporation disbursed the loan in favour of Piklu Ghosh and the money was deposited to his account in the ICICI Bank without any intimation to him. The allegation is that, though the loan amount was disbursed in his account, but the same was withdrawn by some other persons and in the process, Piklu Ghosh, the informant was never informed regarding such deposit or withdrawal of the loan amount from his account at ICICI Bank. Later on, when Piklu Ghosh, the informant came to know that the money was deposited in his ICICI bank account, he inquired about the matter and found that a sum of Rs. 5 lakh had been withdrawn from his account even though he did not issue any cheque for such withdrawal.

So, he lodged the complaint with the Officer-in-Charge of the West Agartala police station to inquire into the matter, as according to him, Ajoy Das and Jagadish Debbarma are responsible for withdrawal of such money without his knowledge.

Mr. Sarkar, learned counsel further submits that Ajoy Das, the accused petitioner, is totally innocent and if he is arrested, he will lose his job. Mr. Sarkar, learned counsel also submits that it is a case of documentary evidence and the bank authority did not find any fault of the accused person in the process of operation of the bank account.

Per contra, Mr. Datta, learned PP has submitted that it is a clear case of cheating and mis-appropriation of money. Mr. Datta, learned PP has fairly submitted that serious investigation is necessary into this aspect because it involves public interest, only to protect the innocent consumers of the bank. Mr. Datta, learned PP has also produced the case diary.

(3.)I have perused the case diary and found that there are some other persons who also suffered similar circumstances when their money was withdrawn by some other persons without their knowledge.

Click here to view full judgement.
Copyright © Regent Computronics Pvt.Ltd.