The Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court recently allowed the bail plea of a bank manager accused in a financial fraud and corruption case, while emphasizing that the grant of bail in cases attracting the death penalty or life imprisonment is “an exception and not the rule.”
Justice Mohd Yousuf Wani was hearing the bail application of the bank manager, who has been in custody since February 2025 for his alleged role in a criminal conspiracy involving fraudulent loans, forgery, and corruption.
“No single rule or a golden litmus test is applicable for consideration of a bail application. Instead, some material principles and guidelines need to be kept in mind by the courts and magistrates,” the court observed. It noted that the pros and cons of each case must be carefully weighed before deciding on bail.
The case pertains to the bank manager’s alleged involvement in a complex scheme in which co-accused individuals conspired to defraud the bank of crores of rupees. The manager allegedly processed loan files for 18 fake employees, ignoring discrepancies in their documents, and received bribes in cash and bank transactions.
The charges against him include Sections 419, 429, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code, along with Sections 7 and 13 of the Prevention of Corruption Act. The FIR was registered in 2023 by the Economic Offences Wing (EOW) of the Jammu crime branch.
While granting bail, the court laid down key guidelines for judicial consideration of bail applications:
Judicial discretion must be exercised with utmost care and circumspection.
The nature and circumstances of the case must be duly considered.
There should be an assessment of the risk of witnesses being tampered with or the investigation being hampered.
Individual liberty must be balanced against the larger interests of society and the State.
The nature of the charge, the evidence, potential punishment, and the likelihood of interfering with justice must all be weighed.
The cumulative effect of all relevant circumstances should guide the decision, rather than any single factor.
The court clarified that its order on bail does not affect the merits of the case, which will be addressed during the trial. Observing that the co-accused had already been granted bail, it reiterated that the decision depends on a variety of circumstances, assessed carefully in each case.