Gurjeet Singh v. State

$~10 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + BAIL APPLN. 150/2020 GURJEET SINGH ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Pradeep Chaudhary, Advocate

Versus

STATE ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. G.M.Farooqui, Additional Public Prosecutor for State with SI Satyawan Mr. D.S.Kohli & Mr.Raghav, Advocates for complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI

O R D E R

% 19.02.2020 Petitioner is seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 359/2019, under Sections 420/468/34 IPC, registered at police station Uttam Nagar, Delhi while claiming to be innocent and having been falsely implicated in this case.

Learned counsel for petitioner submits that the subject matter of this FIR is a civil dispute of Rs.48,00,000/- allegedly given by the complainant to the petitioner. Learned counsel for petitioner further submits that the allegations levelled against the petitioner are false. In fact, the petitioner had only procured a loan of Rs.5,00,000/- from the complainant against which he had issued a blank cheque as security, which has been manipulated by the complainant and an amount of

Rs.48,00,000/- has been written on the said cheque and a criminal complaint under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 has also been filed against the petitioner.

On the other hand, the instant bail application is opposed by learned Additional Public Prosecutor for State on the ground that investigation in this case is at the initial stage and the petitioners have submitted forged documents and custodial interrogation of petitioner is required for recovery of amount and for further investigation in this case. Heard.

In view of the above facts and particularly the fact that original documents viz. acknowledgement receipt, fixed deposit summary issued by GSS Pvt. Ltd. and sanction letter dated 23rd January, 2017 of Reserve Bank of India are alleged to be forged and custodial interrogation of the petitioner is also required for the recovery of amount, this Court is not inclined to grant concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. The application stands dismissed accordingly. BRIJESH SETHI, J FEBRUARY 19, 2020 r