State Of NCT Of Delhi v. Akhil Jain

$~24 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ CRL.M.C. 492/2021 STATE OF NCT OF DELHI .....Petitioner Through:

Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP with SI Ajay, PS EOW versus AKHIL JAIN .....Respondent Through:

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE JASMEET SINGH

O R D E R

% 28.11.2024 1.

This is a petition seeking cancellation of bail granted to the respondent vide order dated 29.08.2020 passed by the Ld. ASJ-04, Special Judge: POCSO Act, North West, Rohini Courts, Delhi. 2.

Ms. Dalal, learned APP states that in the present case, the respondent was part of M/s M.M. Industries along with Mr. Sidharth Jain. Mr. Jain forged property documents and obtained a loan from Corporation Bank for Rs. 27 crores by mortgaging the title deeds. Hence, the respondent being a part of M/s M.M. Industries and a partner of Mr. Sidharth Jain has usurped and misappropriated funds worth Rs. 27 crores by misusing documents which were forged and fabricated. In addition, admittedly, the respondent signed on the deed of guarantee agreement and application for credit facility with the bank.

3.

In the present case, on 19.09.2019, the respondent was arrested and The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2024 at 11:41:26

released on 29.08.2020.

4.

The investigation is complete and chargesheet has already been filed. 5.

From the documents on record, the learned Session Court has duly appreciated the factual matrix and observed that the respondent was inducted as partner of M/s M.M. Industries and on the same date, the loan was obtained. There are no documents which show that the loan of Rs. 27 crores was embezzled by the respondent or he received any amount either in his personal bank account. No money has been recovered from the respondent, his family members or his relatives leading to an inference and also the respondent was not a beneficiary of the alleged loan. 6.

Further investigation of money trail is being conducted by the petitioner.

7.

It has also been stated that the respondent signed and gave numerous blank documents to Mr. Sidharth Jain to obtain personal loan in another company run by the respondent.

8.

The above facts have correctly been appreciated by the learned Session Court while granting bail to the respondent. I see no reason to interfere in the said order.

9.

The observations are only for the purpose of deciding this application and nothing said hereinabove shall be affecting the merits as and when the matter is taken up for final hearing.

10.

The petition is accordingly dismissed.

JASMEET SINGH, J NOVEMBER 28, 2024/DM Click here to check corrigendum, if any The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 07/12/2024 at 11:41:26