ORDER : 1. By way of this successive bail application filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the applicant, seeks regular bail in connection with FIR being C.R. No. 11202008210428 of 2021 registered with City “A” Division Police Station, Jamnagar, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 406, 408, 409, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 and 114 of IPC. 2. Brief facts giving rise to file present application is that, the Gujarat State Cooperative Agricultural and Rural Development Bank, established under cooperative sector, is dealing with farmers issues, more particularly, bank is sanctioning financial aid in the form of farming loan so as to enable the farmers to take seasonal crops and they can purchase necessary instruments for farming. The bank has its branches in all districts. The present applicant Sahendrasinh Zala was recruited as a Clerk and lastly, he was promoted as Branch Manager. The accused no. 1 – Deepak Bhatt, was originally recruited in the cadre of Clerk and was retired in the year 2015 and was reemployed on contract basis for a period of 3 months i.e. 1.4.2018 to 30.06.2018. It is alleged in the FIR that, during the year 2014-2020, the accused have defrauded the bank and misappropriated the huge amount to the tune of Rs.2 crore and more. It is alleged that, in connivance with each other, did not perform their duties properly as a bank employee and misused their powers for personal gains. It is further alleged in the FIR that, accused no.1 was used to forge receipts and No Due Certificates and other related documents in favour of farmers loanee and accepted the installments as well as loan amount and failed to given a credit in the farmers’ accounts. It is further alleged that, they have also signed necessary certificates to release the mortgaged properties of the farmers. So far present applicant is concerned, it is alleged that, without any authority, he engaged the service of accused no.1 and permitted him to issue money receipts and other documents and misused the security cheques given by account holders for taking the amount of repayment of loan and used the same for personal use instead of depositing the same with the bank. 3. 3. In the aforesaid facts, the branch manager of the bank lodged an FIR inter-alia alleging that being a bank employee, the accused have committed the offence of cheating, criminal breach of trust and act of forgery by making false documents for the purpose of cheating and allegedly used them as genuine documents. 4. The earlier bail application was withdrawn by the applicant with a liberty to file fresh petition after filing of the charge-sheet. The applicant accused no. 2, is arrested on 17.05.2022. The Sessions Court, vide its order dated 06.09.2022, rejected the bail application, which was filed after filing the charge-sheet. 5. Aggrieved with the order and considering the facts of filing the charge-sheet, the applicant has preferred present application. 6. Heard learned counsel Ms. Megha Jani for and on behalf of applicant accused. She has raised the following contentions: (i) As per the FIR, period of offence is from 01.01.2014 to 31.12.2020, whereas, the FIR came to be filed on 06.03.2021 i.e. after a delay of 7 years 3 months, for which, no any satisfactory explanation offered by the complainant. It is in this context, it was submitted that, in the year 1995, the applicant was appointed as Peon in the bank, and thereafter, in the year 2014, he was promoted to the post of Clerk and lastly, in the month of October, 2017, he was appointed as supervisor –cum-branch manager. After resuming the charge as Branch Manager, he had undertaken the recovery process of the bank loan and it came to notice that many of the agriculturist loans, that already paid installment of the loan, to accused no.1, and in turn, he used to issue payment receipt. Even in the case of full and final settlement of the loan account, he had issued receipt of full and final payment and failed to deposit the amount in the loan account. Even he was used to issue form No. 58A which is the certificate, to show that loan amount is fully paid. It is in this context, the learned counsel submitted that, the accused no. 1 who had been working with the branch at Jamnagar much prior to the appointment of the petitioner as Supervisor-cum-branch Manager. Even he was used to issue form No. 58A which is the certificate, to show that loan amount is fully paid. It is in this context, the learned counsel submitted that, the accused no. 1 who had been working with the branch at Jamnagar much prior to the appointment of the petitioner as Supervisor-cum-branch Manager. Thus, it is evident from the record that, none of the witnesses have alleged against the applicant that he has issued a No Due Certificate and other papers and the applicant was privy to the acts committed by the accused no.1 and the applicant having knowledge about the irregularities and misdeeds committed by the accused no.1. (ii) Ms. Megha Jani, learned counsel submitted that, the entire fraud was committed by the accused no. 1 and he who had pocketed the alleged amount of misappropriation for which, he had admitted his guilt and assured on oath to repay the entire amount. In support of this contention, the learned counsel drew the attention of this Court towards declaration cum affidavit of accused no.1, to submit that, prior to the FIR, the accused no.1 confessed his guilt and assured the bank to repay the entire amount and same evidence forwarded to the higher authority for necessary action against the accused no.1 and thereafter, the complaint against the accused no.1 was also filed which facts having not been disclosed in the present FIR which speaks voluminous about the false implication of the present applicant. (iii) Ms. Megha Jani, learned counsel, referring to charge-sheet case papers, submitted that, during the investigation carried out by the CID Crime Branch, nothing brought on record to establish that, the applicant herein in any way have received any monetary benefits from the accused no.1. She submitted that, the witnesses, who have been examined by the investigating agency have categorically stated in their statement that the accused no. 1 had actively participated in the fraudulent activities. Thus, there is no evidence on record to indicate that, the applicant has received any financial gain committed out of forged and fabricated documents allegedly prepared by accused no. 1. 7. In view of the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel Ms. Jani submitted that, the entire case is based on documentary evidence and now same is the part of the charge-sheet. The investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. 1. 7. In view of the aforesaid contentions, the learned counsel Ms. Jani submitted that, the entire case is based on documentary evidence and now same is the part of the charge-sheet. The investigation is over and charge-sheet is filed. The evidence of hand writing expert are also not pointing finger towards the present applicant. Thus, when further custody of the applicant is not necessary and trial will not conclude in near future, keeping behind the bar, would not serve any fruitful purpose. In such circumstances, she prays to exercise the discretion in favour of the applicant, by enlarging him on bail. 8. On the other hand, learned State counsel Ms. Krina Calla and Mr. Yogesh Ravani, learned counsel appearing for the bank-complainant, reiterating the contents of the sworn affidavit of the complainant, vehemently opposed the bail application and contended that, there is prima-facie case against the accused and there is a reasonable ground to believe that the accused have committed the alleged offence of fraud and misappropriation of the alleged amount. It was submitted that, the present applicant became Branch Manager on 09.11.2016 and had served till 2020. He was appointed as Clerk in the same bank and in the same branch and therefore, he was aware about the act and misdeeds of the accused no.1. That, the witnesses who are farmers and bank employees, have categorically stated that the applicant had also issued No Due Certificate under Form 58A which facts indicates his active participation in the offence. That, after retirement of accused no.1, the present applicant without there being any approval from higher authority, permitted him to work as a Clerk with a view to facilitate him to commit the offence by collecting the amount from the agriculturists. Thus, therefore, the entire offence would not have been possible without involvement of the present applicant. That, being a responsible bank officer, without verifying the documents, the applicant had signed the receipts, N.O.C. and issued No Due Certificate which facts establishes his involvement in the offence. That, the declaration cum affidavit admitting the guilt of the offence, disclosed by the accused no.1, prima-facie shows that, in order to avoid the liability, the applicant-accused pressurize the accused no.1 to execute the said declaration. 9. In the aforesaid contentions, learned State Counsel as well as Mr. That, the declaration cum affidavit admitting the guilt of the offence, disclosed by the accused no.1, prima-facie shows that, in order to avoid the liability, the applicant-accused pressurize the accused no.1 to execute the said declaration. 9. In the aforesaid contentions, learned State Counsel as well as Mr. Yogesh Ravani, learned counsel for the bank-complainant submitted that, fraud is committed with the bank and therefore, the offence committed is an economic offence and therefore, in such cases the victim is society in general including the farmers of the bank is the sufferer. Thus, considering the gravity of the offence and its impact on the society, no case is made out for exercising judicial discretion. 10. Heard at length learned counsel for the respective parties and perused the material placed on record. 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case, it appears that, the applicant herein being a Branch Manager, had informed the higher authorities vide communication dated 18.09.2020, stating, inter-alia that, Mr. Bhatt committed irregularities by issuing forged receipts and misused the stationary of the bank and therefore, please grant permission to lodge an FIR against him. It needs to be noted that, in the communication, the applicant had also sent the declaration cum affidavit of Mr. Bhatt, whereby he had admitted his guilt and assured to repay the entire amount. It is pertinent to note that, in the month of September-2020, written complaint addressed to PSI, Jamnagar City ‘A’ Division was given by the complainant, accusing the accused no.1 Mr. Bhatt for the alleged act of forgery, cheating and criminal breach of trust, without arraigning the present applicant as accused. The report of the Handwriting Expert does not point out the involvement of the present applicant in issuing the forged certificates and other documents. During the course of investigation, the I.O. has examined the farmers who have been cheated by Mr. Bhatt and the employees of the bank have also alleging against Mr. Bhatt. In such circumstances, prima-facie, it appears that, nothing brought on record to show that the applicant was beneficiary of the alleged act of Mr. Bhatt. 12. In view of the foregoing reasons and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the applicant is in custody since 17.05.2022. Charge-sheet has already been filed and trial is not likely to conclude in near future. Bhatt. 12. In view of the foregoing reasons and considering the peculiar facts and circumstances of the present case, the applicant is in custody since 17.05.2022. Charge-sheet has already been filed and trial is not likely to conclude in near future. When the further custody of the applicant is not necessary and the applicant does not have any past criminal record and he will not flee from justice and entire prosecution case is based on documentary evidence and same is the part of charge-sheet, without expressing further on the merits of the case, I am inclined to release the applicant on bail. 13. Hence, present application is allowed and the applicant is ordered to be released on regular bail in connection with the FIR being C.R. No. 11202008210428 of 2021 registered with City “A” Division Police Station, Jamnagar, on executing a personal bond of Rs.10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only), with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court and subject to the conditions that he shall; No. Conditions (a) not take undue advantage of liberty or misuse liberty; (b) not act in a manner injuries to the interest of the prosecution; (c) surrender passport, if any, to the lower court within a week; (d) not leave India without prior permission of the Sessions Judge concerned; (e) furnish latest address of residence to the Investigating Officer and also to the Court at the time of execution of the bond and shall not change the residence without prior permission of the trial Court; 14. The Authorities will release the applicant only if he is not required in connection with any other offence for the time being. If breach of any of the above conditions is committed, the Sessions Judge concerned will be free to issue warrant or take appropriate action in the matter. Bail bond to be executed before the learned Lower Court having jurisdiction to try the case. It will be open for the concerned Court to delete, modify and/or relax any of the above conditions, in accordance with law. At the trial, learned Trial Court shall not be influenced by the observations of preliminary nature, qua the evidence at this stage, made by this Court while enlarging the applicant on bail. Rule is made absolute to the aforesaid extent. Direct service is permitted.