MOHANJEET SINGH JUNEJA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN
LAWS(RAJ)-2002-7-94
HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN
Decided on July 19,2002

MOHANJEET SINGH JUNEJA Appellant
VERSUS
STATE OF RAJASTHAN Respondents

JUDGEMENT

Khem Chand Sharma, J. - (1.) This application for bail u/s 439 Cr.P.C. arises out of the FIR registered for offence under Sections 467, 468, 471, 199, 200 and 120B IPC.
(2.) It is contended by Mr. Jagdeep Dhanker learned counsel, appearing for the petitioner that originally, the personal loan scheme was based on the trust of borrowers. With a view to plug the short comings in the scheme some modifications came to be introduced on 21/6/2001. Some relevant modifications are reproduced below: (a) The Branch Manager/Manager of Division should confirm that particulars furnished by the applicant are genuine and authenticated by authorised drawing and disbursing authority of the department, preferably by visit to the employees office/ residence and mention the date of visit Tin his recommendation. (b) The Branch Manager/Manager of Division will also confirm the applicants net income from employers record/Lt. Form No. 16. (c) The applicant must be an existing customer of the branch having a satisfactorily maintained account. No penalty for prepayment: (i) Letter of undertaking to be obtained from the employer of the applicant agreeing to deduct the amount of instalment from the borrowers salary and remit to the bank directly. in case of default, if possible. (ii) Wherever defaults occur, say for 3 months prompt action is taken for the recovery of the bankTs dues including under Section 138 of N.J. Act by legal notices. Where check off is available. undertaking/affidavit on stamped paper would be taken from the applicant confirming that he has not availed personal loan from any other institution/bank and would not avail such loan in future too before the repayment of the applied loan. g) All documents regarding proof of identity /residence/income should be taken in original or attested copy duly certified by the sanctioning authority IBM with a noting that these have been personally verified from the original by him,
(3.) Jt appears that certain checks enumerated above were evolved in the Scheme to prevent availment of multiple finance by the borrowers, which were not in the original personal loan scheme.;


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