Chamkaur Singh v. The State Govt Of NCT Of Delhi
7# $~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + CHAMKAUR SINGH ..... Petitioner Represented by:
Mr. Raj Kumar, Mr. Ashok Kumar, Ms. Sangita Chauhan and Mr. Abhishek Sarkar, Advocates.
versus THE STATE GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent Represented by:
Mr. Amit Gupta, APP for State with SI Parveen Rathee, PS Chanakya Puri.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
O R D E R
% 14.05.2018 1.
By this petition, petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.224/2015 under Sections 420/468/471/120B IPC registered at PS Chanakya Puri, Delhi on the complaint received from the Assistant Regional Security Officer, U.S. Embassy, New Delhi.
2.
In the above noted complaint Shri Timothy Ayers, Assistant Regional Security Officer, U.S. Embassy, New Delhi informed that on 22nd September, 2015 an individual identifying himself to be Rohit Kumar applied for a non-immigrant visa in U.S. Embassy in New Delhi. Rohit Kumar claimed that he was born on 1st July, 1987 at Sitarganj, Uttarakhand and presented an Indian Passport No.M7679306 as proof of his identity. His address on record was village Kondha Ashraf, PO Bijti Patiya, Sitarganj,
Uttarakhand. In the visa application Rohit Kumar claimed to own Hindustan Dairy Pvt. Ltd. located at Industrial Park Sidcul, Sitarganj, Uttarakhand and the business card and visa letter of the said company was also enclosed. When Rohit Kumar appeared before the Embassy official he made a statement that he did not own Hindustan Dairy Pvt. Ltd. and the documents he had submitted were fraudulent and had been provided to him by one Chamkaur Singh, the present petitioner. 3.
According to Rohit Kumar's disclosure statement after his arrest the petitioner was an agent who provided him a fake letter head and business card of Hindustan Dairy Pvt. Ltd. in 2013. Thus efforts were made to trace the petitioner who joined the investigation on 27th September, 2017 and denied having provided any letter head or business card to Rohit Kumar. According to the petitioner, in fact Rohit Kumar stated to him that he can arrange visa for him to Dubai for which he gave him ₹3 lakhs in cash however, when he asked for the Visa for Dubai, Rohit Kumar denied the same and stated that he would arrange a visa for USA but his application was rejected.
4.
Documents submitted by Rohit Kumar were sent to RFSL and according to the opinion of FSL hand writing on the questioned documents matched with the specimen signatures of the accused Rohit Kumar. 5.
Considering that during the course of investigation only evidence against the petitioner is the disclosure statement of the co-accused which version of the co-accused has not been fortified by the FSL report, this Court deems it fit to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioner. It is, therefore, directed that in the event of arrest the petitioner be released on bail on his
furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹25,000/- with one surety of the like amount, subject to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer/ SHO concerned further subject to the condition that the petitioner will join the investigation as and when directed by the Investigating Officer, further subject to the condition that the petitioner will not leave the country without prior permission of the court concerned and in case of change of residential address the same will be intimated to the Court concerned by way of an affidavit.
6.
Petition is disposed of.
7.
Order dasti.
MUKTA GUPTA, J.
MAY 14, 2018 'vn'