JUDGEMENT
VIVEK SINGH THAKUR, J. -
(1.)Petitioner has approached this Court for grant of regular bail under Sec. 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in case FIR No. 23 of 2021, dtd. 3/3/2021, registered under Ss. 420, 467, 468, 471, 409 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code in Police Station East Shimla.
(2.)Status Report stands filed, wherein it is stated that Shri Navin Kumar Patial, Branch Manager of State Bank of India, Panthaghati (Shimla), presented an application to the police, stating therein that on 8/12/2015, coaccused Jitender Verma and Sanjeev Kumar approached State Bank of Bikaner and Jaipur (now after merger, State Bank of India) and made a request for grant of Home Loan of Rs.15,00,000.00 for purchase of property, and that request of these co-accused was considered by the Bank and the Bank agreed to grant Home Loan on the terms and conditions as stipulated in the Sanction Letter. Thereafter, in order to secure the loan, these accused persons mortgaged their property and deposited original title document, i.e. Sale Deed, registered vide registration No.2698, vide which equitable mortgage has been created, and the bank sanctioned the loan and asked these two persons to execute registered mortgage deed also, on which they deposited mortgage deed registered vide registration No.8890. When bank official visited the property, he found that the borrowers had sold all the flats in the property and same was confirmed by the Bank's Empanelled Advocate in his title investigation report that said sale deed was not found registered with Sub Registrar, Shimla.
(3.)It is stated in the Status Report that the aforesaid two accused had also approached the aforesaid Bank, on 15/6/2015, and made a request/applied for grant of Home Loan of Rs.20,00,000.00 for completion/finishing of semifinished house, which was sanctioned on the terms and conditions mentioned in the Sanction Letter, and for the purpose supplied and deposited mortgage deed registered in the office of Sub Registrar Theog, vide Registration No.479, but, on inquiry, the said mortgage deed was found to be forged and fabricated document.