Page No.# 1/5 GAHC010215992024 2025:GAU-AS:173 THE GAUHATI HIGH COURT (HIGH COURT OF ASSAM, NAGALAND, MIZORAM AND ARUNACHAL PRADESH) Case No. : AB/2768/2024 PULEN BARMAN AND ANR S/O LATE KHAGEN BARMAN, R/O CHATAIBARI, P.S.-GHOGRAPAR, DIST- NALBARI, ASSAM 2: JUMI BARMAN W/O PULEN BARMAN R/O CHATAIBARI P.S.-GHOGRAPAR DIST- NALBARI ASSA VERSUS THE STATE OF ASSAM REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, ASSAM Advocate for the Petitioner : MR. S C BISWAS, MR. A K DAS,MS. U NANDA,MS A DAS,MR R ISLAM,MS. K L R YANTHAN Advocate for the Respondent : PP, ASSAM, Page No.# 2/5 BEFORE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE MRIDUL KUMAR KALITA ORDER 06.01.2025 1. Heard Mr. S.C. Biswas, learned counsel for the petitioners. Also heard Mr. D.P. Goswami, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the State of Assam. 2. This application under Section 482 of the BNSS, 2023 has been filed by the petitioners, namely, (1) Sri Pulen Barman, and (2) Smt. Jumi Barman, who are apprehending their arrest in connection with BI (EO) P.S. Case No. 06/2024 under Section 120(B)/420/406/409 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. 3. The gist of accusation in this case is that on 10.09.2024, Mahendra Kumar, Regional Head, Barpeta Road Regional Office of Central Bank of India, had lodged an FIR before the Officer-In-Charge of the Bureau of Investigation (Economic Offences) Guwahati, inter alia, alleging that the accused persons named in the FIR, including the present petitioners, have committed fraud and misappropriation of public money at the Central Bank of India, Dhamdhama Branch in the district of Baksa, Assam. It has been alleged that there has been unauthorized transaction in the Self-Help Group (SHG) accounts at the branch office of the Bank at Dhamdhama during the tenure when the accused No. 1 named in the FIR, namely, Mr. Kiran Das was branch manager of the said branch. 4. It has been alleged that embezzlement in the Self-Help Group loan accounts were found, on different dates, by the Branch Manager, Mr. Page No.# 3/5 Kiran Das, with the help of branch business correspondents, Mrs. Jumi Barman and Mr. Pulen Barman. It is also alleged that after detection of the embezzlement, an amount of total Rs. 28 lakhs, which was fraudulently withdrawn from the SHG accounts have been returned back to the account of the borrowers by way of cash/transfer/NEFT/RTGS. 5. It is also alleged that during discrete inquiry, it has been found that an amount of Rs. 3,25,29,657.17(Three Crore Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Seven and Seventeen Paise only) has been withdrawn through unauthorized and unlawful transactions on various dates. 6. Mr. S.C. Biswas, the learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are not involved in the offence alleged in the FIR against them. He submits that the petitioner No. 1, namely Pulen Barman is only working as the driver of the Branch Manager of the said bank, whereas petitioner No. 2, even does not know that her account in the said bank has been used as a conduit by the bank officials to transit the amount from the accounts of Self-Help Groups (SHGs). 7. The learned counsel for the petitioners has also submitted that the petitioner No. 1 happens to be the driver of the Bank Manager of the said bank and their pass-books were with the Bank Manager and he is also not aware how his account has been used as a conduit for transaction of amount from the account of Self-Help Groups (SHGs). 8. The learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners are ready to co-operate in the investigation and therefore, their Page No.# 4/5 custodial detention may not be necessary for fair completion of the investigation. Hence, they may be allowed to go on bail. 9. On the other hand, Mr. D.P. Goswami, the learned Additional Public Prosecutor has produced the Case Diary of BI (EO) P.S. Case No. 06/2024 and has vehemently opposed the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners on the ground that there are sufficient incriminating materials against the present petitioners in the Case Diary. 10. He also submits that the quantum of money involved in the instant case of embezzlement is huge and granting benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner at this stage would jeopardize the investigation. 11. I have considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for both the sides and have perused the materials available on record, including the case diary of BI (EO) P.S. Case No. 06/2024. 12. The allegations levelled in the FIR is regarding embezzlement of huge amount of money to the extent of Rs. 3,25, 29,657.17(Three Crore Twenty Five Lakh Twenty Nine Thousand Six Hundred Fifty Seven and Seventeen Paise only) and there are incriminating materials in the Case Diary, which indicates that the bank account of the petitioners were used on several instances for deposits/withdrawal/transfers of money involved in the embezzlement. 13. It also appears from the Case Diary that the investigation has not much progressed. However, there are several incriminating materials against the present petitioners which do not justify grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners at this stage. Hence, the prayer for grant of Page No.# 5/5 anticipatory bail to the above-named petitioners is rejected. 14. Send back the Case Diary. 15. This bail application is accordingly disposed of. JUDGE Comparing Assistant