TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 1102
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ayer to enlarge him on bail. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the applicant is aged about 70 years and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits that the applicant was posted as Senior Manager Credit in Bank of India, Harshnagar Branch, Kanpur for the period from July 2006 to 7 November, 2006. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that The CBI/ACB/Lucknow registered the case in the year, 2007 vide Crime No. RC 006/2007/A/0008 on 31.03.2007 under Sections 120-B, 420, 467, 468, 471 I.P.C. and 13(2) read with 13(1)(d) of PC Act, 1988 with the allegation that some loan was given by the Bank officials on the basis of forged and fictitious documents. Thereafter, the CBI filed 8 separate charge sheet i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... this is incorrect as the tenure of the applicant is from July 2006 to 7 November, 2006. He further submits that the Directorate of Enforcement conducted the investigation for a period of about 8 years, but in the complaint, no substantial facts have been stated in relation to the allegation against the applicant and merely on the basis of vague statement of Vinny Sodhi @ Vikram Dixit that the applicant gave Rs. 1,10,000/ to the Branch manager and loan officer. The proceedings have been initiated. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that it is bounded duty of the officer of the Directorate of Enforcement to discover the evidence to prove the case by conducting investigation. He further submits that the applicant has appeared....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ion of India in Bail Application No. 2324 of 2018 and submits that the bail is the rule and refusal is the exception, especially in the circumstances when the applicant cooperated in the investigation from the date of registration of ECIR to filing of the complaint. He further submits that he is also on bail in the schedule offences and the trial is still pending since last more than 10 years. Learned counsel for the applicant further submits that direction was given to the respondent-authorities to file supplementary affidavit and explain that what was the working period of the applicant and how much money is in question for the said period. Thereafter, supplementary affidavit was filed by Mr. Devendra Kumar Singh, Assistant Director and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of Bihar (2016) 3 SCC 183, State of Gujrat vs. Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and Another (1987) 2 SCC 364, Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy vs. CBI 2013 (7) SCC 439 and Rohit Tandon Vs. Directorate of Enforcement 2018, (11) SCC 46. He also submits that bail order passed by the Delhi High Court in the case of Shivendra Mohan Singh S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 3474 of 2020 is admitted and the restraint order is passed. In such circumstances, as the economy of the country is ruined by the applicant with the connivance of the other co-accused, therefore he is not entitled for bail, but he does not dispute that the ECIR was registered in the year of 2010 and investigation was going on under Section 50 of PML Act for a period of about 8 years. He also does not disput....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the liberty given by the Directorate of Enforcement and the facts of the cases cited by the learned counsel for the respondent are not applicable in the present case, as the Directorate of Enforcement relied on the statement of the Vinny Sodhi @ Vikram Dixit mentioned in Para 11.1 of the complaint in which it is stated that the applicant was not named by the co-accused Vikram Dixit, as statement is only referred that he gave Rs. 1,10,000/ to the Bank Manager and loan officer. Investigation was conducted by the investigating officer of Directorate of Enforcement for a period of about 8 years and it was obligatory on his part to discover all the facts and the evidence against the accused persons. In such circumstances, it is a fit case for ba....