A Bengaluru City Civil and Sessions Court has granted anticipatory bail to Umesh Gurjar, a 50-year-old tax consultant accused of involvement in a high-value bank loan fraud involving fabricated income tax documents. The order, delivered by Sri A.V. Patil, the LXIII Additional City Civil and Sessions Judge, provides relief to the petitioner who apprehended arrest following a complaint lodged by Karur Vysya Bank regarding a sanctioned loan totaling 1.44 Crore Rupees.

The case, registered under Crime Number 362/2022 at the Kumaraswamy Layout Police Station, involves several serious charges under the Indian Penal Code, 1860, including Section 406 for criminal breach of trust, Section 419 for punishment for cheating by personation, Section 420 for cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property, Section 463 for forgery, Section 464 for making a false document, Section 468 for forgery for the purpose of cheating, and Section 120(A) for criminal conspiracy.

Allegations of Fabricated Documents and NPA Status

The legal proceedings were initiated following a complaint by Sri P.V. Sambasiva Rao, the Chief Manager of Karur Vysya Bank Ltd. According to the prosecution, the primary borrower (Accused No. 1), acting as the proprietor of M/s Nigmetha Info Tech, sought a loan of 1.44 Crore Rupees to purchase a residential flat in Sarjapura Hobli, Anekal Taluk. The total value of the property was estimated at approximately 1.80 Crore Rupees.

The bank alleged that the borrower, in conspiracy with the tax consultant Umesh Gurjar and other accused parties, submitted fabricated Income Tax Returns (ITR) and title deeds to establish financial eligibility for the loan. Based on these documents, the bank sanctioned and disbursed the amount in the 2019-20 fiscal year. However, the loan account subsequently defaulted and was declared a Non-Performing Asset (NPA) on March 23, 2021. Upon further verification, the bank discovered that the IT documents provided during the application process were false and created solely to induce the bank into sanctioning the high-value loan.

Defense Contends Role of a Middleman

In his bail application, Umesh Gurjar maintained his innocence, stating that he is a professional tax consultant and was merely acting as a brokerage middleman between the bank and the customers. He argued that he had introduced prospective buyers to the landlord (Accused No. 3) in 2019 and assisted in the loan procurement process for a legitimate commission.

The defense emphasized that the bank officials had sanctioned the loan only after their own internal verification of the documents. They further pointed out that the alleged offenses are entirely based on documentary evidence which is already in the possession of the investigating authorities or the bank, thereby negating the need for custodial interrogation. The petitioner also highlighted that there was an inordinate delay in filing the complaint, as the loan became an NPA in early 2021, but the FIR was registered much later.

Court Observations and Conditions for Bail

The court, after hearing both the Public Prosecutor and the counsel for the petitioner, observed that while the offenses under Section 420 and Section 468 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, are non-bailable, they do not carry the penalty of death or life imprisonment. Judge A.V. Patil noted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Bengaluru and that the truth of his involvement in the fabrication of documents is a matter that must be determined during the trial.

The court found that the apprehension of the prosecution regarding the petitioner fleeing or tampering with evidence could be addressed by imposing strict conditions. Consequently, the court allowed the petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

The petitioner was granted anticipatory bail subject to the following conditions:

1. Umesh Gurjar must appear before the Kumaraswamy Layout Police within 20 days of the order.
2. In the event of arrest, he shall be released on a personal bond of 70,000 Rupees with one surety for a like sum.
3. The petitioner is strictly prohibited from tampering with prosecution witnesses.
4. He must appear before the court during the trial and cooperate for the disposal of the case.
5. He must not commit any offense similar to the ones alleged against him.
6. He must appear before the Investigating Officer as and when called for further investigation.
7. He must furnish an attested copy of his Aadhaar card and proof of residential address to the police.

The court clarified that this grant of anticipatory bail does not restrict the rights of the investigating agency to conduct a thorough probe into the charges.