ORDER This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 requesting for grant of anticipatory bail apprehending arrest in Crime No. 93 of 2009 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 by the Cubbon Park Police, Bangalore. 2. The facts relevant for the purpose of this petition are as under: The Branch Manager of the State Bank of India, Church Street, Bangalore, submitted the cOI11plaint to the Police and the complaint reveals the facts that three current accounts were opened at the Church Street Branch of the Bank during the year 2007 in the names of (1) M/s. Sharan Dairy Products; (2) Sri Nandagopal Dairy Products; and (3) M/s. Gourmet Dairy Products. Several transactions were carried out in the above mentioned three accounts and most of the transactions were related to local cheques purchase. The four cheques enumerated in the complaint were purchased by the Branch and the amount was given to the customers by way of crediting to their accounts. The above said cheques were returned unpaid and normally, when the purchased cheques were returned unpaid, the amount will be recovered from the customer concerned. But, the Branch did not recover the amount totalling Rs. 43,56,400/-. The Branch once again lodged the two cheques at S1. Nos. 1 and 2 in clearing and purchased the other two cheques at. S1. Nos. 3 and 4 and credited the proceeds of all the four cheques for the second time to the respective customer accounts. Amongst the four cheques, the two cheques at S1. Nos. 3 and 4 were paid. However, the two cheques at S1. Nos. 1 and 2 were returned unpaid and hence, the amount was recovered by debiting the customer's account on 20-2-2008. It is alleged that the amount given to the customers on the first occasion in all the four cases were not recovered and the Bank is out of funds to the tune of Rs. 43,56,400/-. The Branch has used the National and Local Clearing Account (NLC) to carry out these transactions and as per the systems and procedures, the NLC account is meant for the cheques drawn on four metro centres. But, this account is used for parking cheques drawn on local branches. 43,56,400/-. The Branch has used the National and Local Clearing Account (NLC) to carry out these transactions and as per the systems and procedures, the NLC account is meant for the cheques drawn on four metro centres. But, this account is used for parking cheques drawn on local branches. The zonal office advised the Branch Manager to reverse the entries in NLC by recovering the amount from the customers. But, the Branch had reversed the entries by debiting some other systems suspense accounts mentioned in the complaint. It is in these, circumstances, the complaint claim that there is gross violation of systems and procedures and therefore, requested to take action against the then Manager of the Bank and also the petitioners, who are the customers. 3. The petitioners submit that they are innocent, they have not committed any crime much less the one which have been registered against them and that they have been falsely implicated in the case. So also, they submit that the amount of Rs. 43,5,6,400/- has been recovered and in case if any procedural mistake has been committed, it is by accused 3 and not by the petitioners. Under these circumstances, the petitioners submit that they may be granted anticipatory bail and they are ready and willing to abide by any conditions that may be imposed by this Court for grant of anticipatory bail. 4. The learned High Court Government Pleader submits that there is prima facie material against the petitioners for the offences registered and there is conspiracy between accused 3 and the petitioners in committing the offences registered and hence, he submits that the petition may be rejected. 5. I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and also the learned High Court Government Pleader. 6. The point that arises for my consideration is: ''Whether the petitioners are entitled for the anticipatory bail sought for?" 7. As could be seen from the allegations in the complaint and the relevant account extracts produced, there was sufficient fund in the account of the petitioners and though there is an allegation that at the first occasion the cheques at S1. Nos. 1 and 2 were presented to the Bank, there is nothing in the account extracts to show that they were presented within the time alleged in the complaint. But, when the cheques were presented on the second occasion, the two cheques at S1. Nos. Nos. 1 and 2 were presented to the Bank, there is nothing in the account extracts to show that they were presented within the time alleged in the complaint. But, when the cheques were presented on the second occasion, the two cheques at S1. Nos. 3 and 4 were encashed and insofar as the cheques at S1. Nos. 1 and 2 is concerned, the amount mentioned in the cheques was debited from the account of the petitioners. So whatever the defects in adopting the procedure for producing the cheques by way of discount is concerned, primarily, it is the Manager of the Bank who could be held responsible and not the holder of the account. So, taking into consideration these facts, prima facie at this stage, I am of the opinion that the petitioners are entitled to the anticipatory bail sought for. Hence, I answer the point in affirmative and proceed to pass the following: ORDER The petition is allowed. The petitioners are ordered to be released on bail in the event of their arrest in Crime No. 93 of 2009 of Cubbon Park Police for the offences under Sections 406, 409 and 420 of the IPC on their executing a personal bond for a sum of Rs. 10,000/- each with one surety for the like sum to the satisfaction of the arresting authority with the further following conditions: (i) that the petitioners shall appear before the Police concerned within ten days from the date of this order; (ii) that the petitioners shall co-operate for the investigation; (iii) that the petitioners shall not cause any threat, force, coercion or influence to the prosecution witnesses. The petition is accordingly disposed of.