Research › Search › Judgment

Andhra High Court · body

2020 DIGILAW 703 (AP)

P. A. B. Singh v. State Of Andhra Pradesh

2020-11-09

LALITHA KANNEGANTI

body2020
JUDGMENT Lalitha Kanneganti, J. - This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") to enlarge the petitioner/A9 on bail in the event of his arrest in connection with Crime No.193 of 2019 of Vatsavai Police Station registered for the offences punishable under Sections 420, 409, 477-A and 120-b of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 2. The case of the prosecution is that Kotnana Siva Kumar/A1 who has worked as Manager in Saptagiri Grameena Bank, Kanneveedu Branch during the period from 11.05.2016 to 14.06.2019 has committed some irregularities. He opened accounts in the names of his relatives and friends and illegally and unlawfully transferred the amounts to those accounts to a tune of Rs.1,46,66,000/- (Rupees one crore forty six lakhs sixty six thousand only). It is also alleged in the complaint that A1 with the assistance of other accused had misappropriated the funds of the bank. Basing on the complaint the present crime is registered in which the petitioner is arrayed as A9. There are about 16 accused in this case. 3. Heard Sri G.Kondala Rao, learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that there are no specific overt acts against the petitioner. Further the petitioner is not aware of the amounts transferred to his accounts and as A6 stated that his accounts are overloaded with transactions the petitioner helped for business transactions of A6. The petitioner has no acquaintance with the Bank Manager/A1. 5. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand submits that charge sheet is filed. But so far, they could not arrest the petitioner as he was absconding. Learned Public Prosecutor also submits that earlier the petitioner has filed W.P.No. 15253 of 2019 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to direct respondent No.3-Police therein to comply the provisions of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. during investigation in crime No.193 of 2019. But so far, they could not arrest the petitioner as he was absconding. Learned Public Prosecutor also submits that earlier the petitioner has filed W.P.No. 15253 of 2019 under Article 226 of the Constitution of India with a prayer to direct respondent No.3-Police therein to comply the provisions of Section 41-A Cr.P.C. during investigation in crime No.193 of 2019. This Court by order dated 31.12.2019 was pleased to disposed of the writ petition observing that in view of the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar, (2014) 8 SCC 273 even after issuance of notice under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. when Police Officials did not satisfy with the explanation, Police may follow procedure under Section 41(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. Therefore, respondent No.3 therein was directed to follow the procedure under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. if any reply is submitted by the accused and not satisfied with that, respondent No.3 therein could follow procedure under Section 41(1)(b) of Cr.P.C. He further submits that inspite of the orders of this Court when Police tried to serve notice on the petitioner under Section 41-A of Cr.P.C. the petitioner's whereabouts are not known and he has been absconding. He further submits that the persons who are absconding and not cooperating with the investigation are not entitled for pre-arrest bail. 6. The petitioner was absconding as such, charge sheet could not be filed in respect of this accused. The entire investigation in respect of other accused is already completed and charge sheet is filed. In view of the same this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. 7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed. Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.