Ankur Mathur v. State (Govt.Of NCT Of Delhi)

$~98 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1758/2018 & CRL.M.A.28693/2018 ANKUR MATHUR ..... Petitioner Through:

Mr. Amit Kumar, Advocate.

versus STATE (GOVT.OF NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through:

Mr. Akshai Malik for Mr. Mukesh Kumar, APP for State with SI Sandeep Singh, P.S. Roop Nagar.

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

O R D E R

% 30.07.2018 The allegations have been made in the FIR No.45/2017, registered on 08.03.2017, by Police Station Roop Nagar against the petitioner for investigation into offences punishable under Sections 420/468471 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC).

The petitioner apprehending arrest had earlier moved the court of sessions to seek anticipatory bail which was declined by order dated 20.07.2018. He has, therefore, come up to this Court with similar prayer. The copy of the status report which was filed before the court of sessions has been placed on record.

The learned counsel for the petitioner and Additional Public Prosecutor for the State have been heard and record perused. The petitioner primarily relies on some settlement reached with M/s Transport Corporation of India Limited in the wake of its

grievances in November, 2013 about it having been cheated to the extent of Rs.21,62,310/- and dismissal of complaint under Section 156(3) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) of the said company for registration of a case on "similar allegation". A copy of the order dismissing the application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. in the matter of Transport Corporation of India Limited has been placed on record but the copy of the documents relating to the settlement or the grievances against the backdrop of which such settlement had been reached with Transport Corporation of India Limited have not been shared with the Court.

The police file, on perusal, reveals that the present FIR has been registered on the complaint of United India Insurance Company Limited. It appears the first informant, the Insurance company, in the matter at hand, had an arrangement with M/s MANBRO Insurance Brokers Pvt. Ltd. in which the petitioner herein is a Director. The arrangement with the company of the petitioner was for insurance business to be solicited on behalf of the United India Insurance Company Limited, it having issued, pursuant to the said arrangement, certain policies in favour of Transport Corporation of India Limited which were later found to be forged and fabricated. It was upon revelation of such facts and, upon being served with a legal notice by M/s Shiv Claims that the Insurance Company came to be apprised of the facts that involved its business and good name. In the aforesaid facts and circumstances, it is not a fit case for the petitioner to be admitted to anticipatory bail. The role of the

petitioner vis-a-vis the first informant was not probed in earlier proceedings.

As submitted by the learned Additional Public Prosecutor before this Court as well his custodial interrogation might be required to unearth all relevant facts.

The petition and the application filed therewith are dismissed. R.K.GAUBA, J JULY 30, 2018 srb