Vinod Choudhary v. The State NCT Of Delhi

$~13 *

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

+ BAIL APPLN. 1506/2017 VINOD CHOUDHARY ..... Petitioner Through :Mr. Satyendra Kumar Singh and Mr.

Suresh Kumar, Advs.

versus THE STATE NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Through :Mr.

M.S.

Oberoi, APP with SI Mahendra, P.S. Keshav Puram Mr. Jaspal Singh and Mr. Kapil Chawla, Advs. for complainant

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A.K. PATHAK

O R D E R

% 14.09.2017 Complainant has specifically alleged in the FIR that petitioner was known to him for the last four years. Complainant stated that he was in the business of supplying PVC material. Petitioner had won his confidence and purchased goods/raw material worth `29,00,000/- from him on credit. He did not clear the dues.

After a lot of persuasion, petitioner issued three cheques against total outstanding of Rs.28,72,500/-, vide cheque nos. 004955 and 004957 dated 3rd October, 2016 and 5th October, 2016 respectively for Rs.10,00,000/- each and cheque no. 004956 dated 4th

October, 2016 for `8,72,500/-. He assured that cheques would be cleared on presentation.

However, when the cheques were presented, same were returned unpaid with the remarks "signature mismatch". When he contacted the petitioner and told him to make the payment, he threatened him with dire consequences.

Learned APP for the State, who is assisted by the learned counsel for the complainant, submits that petitioner had induced the complainant to supply the goods worth `29,00,000/- and had intentionally issued the cheques with the signatures different than his specimen signatures in bank, knowing-fully-well that the cheques would be dishonoured. Petitioner's custodial interrogation is required. His specimen signatures have also to be taken.

Keeping in mind the totality of the facts and circumstances of this case, I am of the view that petitioner is not entitled to the anticipatory bail. Anticipatory bail application is dismissed.

A.K. PATHAK, J.

SEPTEMBER 14, 2017 rb