Ram Kumar v. The State (Govt. Of N.C.T Of Delhi)

$~7 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 443/2020 RAM KUMAR ..... Petitioner Through Mr Sher Singh Chauhan, Advocate.

versus THE STATE (GOVT. OF N.C.T OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms Kusum Dhalla, APP for State.

SI Anuj Yadav, P.S. Dwarka North.

Mr Arjun Singh, Advocate

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R

% 28.02.2020 1.

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia, praying that he be granted anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0218/2019 under Sections 420/406/120-B/34 of the IPC, registered with PS Dwarka North, Delhi.

2.

The said FIR was registered at the instance of complainant, namely, Sh Jai Ram Meena. He had alleged that he had been introduced to the petitioner through one of the employees of the school, where he was posted as a Vice Principal. He was informed that the petitioner could arrange for the job of a skill assistant in Central Water Commission for his nephews. It is also alleged that the complainant was also shown some documents indicating vacant posts and petitioner represented that each candidate is required to deposit a sum of ₹6,00,000/- as a security deposit bond, which

would be returned after confirmation of the appointment. The complainant alleges that he handed over an aggregate sum of ₹18 lakhs in cash to the petitioner on different dates between September, 2017 to December, 2017. It is also alleged that the petitioner paid two cheques for a sum of ₹13 lakhs and ₹6 lakhs respectively in favour of the complainant as a security. The said cheques were dishonoured on presentation. 3.

The status report has been filed, which indicates that during investigation, statements of the complainant and the independent witnesses have been recorded and they support the allegations made in the FIR in question. The complainant had also produced an audio CD, which contains recordings of various conversations. The original cheques issued by the petitioner have also been seized. Given the allegations against the accused and the current status of investigation, this Court does not consider it apposite to allow the present petition.

4.

The petition is, accordingly, dismissed.

VIBHU BAKHRU, J FEBRUARY 28, 2020 pkv