Rakesh Kumar Arora v. State (Gnct Of Delhi)
$~4 *
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 2684/2015 & CRL.M.A. 32487/2019 RAKESH KUMAR ARORA ..... Petitioner Through Mr Vivek Gupta, Advocate versus STATE (GNCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent Through: Ms Meenakshi Chauhan, APP for State. Inspt. Dharmendra Kumar, EOW.
Mr Ajit Kumar, Advocate proxy counsel for Mr Sidharth Joshi, Advocate for complainant Mr Harpawan Kumar Arora, Advocate for Committee Golden Forests (P) Ltd.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU
O R D E R
% 09.10.2019 1.
This is an application filed by the petitioner seeking bail in connection with FIR No. 192/2007 under Sections 406/409/467/468/471/120-B of the IPC registered with P.S. Jafarpur Kalan, Delhi. 2.
The allegation against the petitioner is that he had sold lands belonging to Golden Projects Limited to one Sh Madan Lal. The same was unauthorised and in a conspiracy to cheat the purchasers of the said lands as well as the creditors of the Golden Forest Group. The said land had been sold twice over. It is also alleged that the same was contrary to the orders passed by the Bombay High Court.
3.
The petitioner claims that he acted as a broker and only received a
sum of ₹5,00,000/- as brokerage from Sh Madan Lal. However, it is alleged that out of the sum of ₹50 lakhs, which was stated to be the consideration for the land sold, the petitioner had received a sum of ₹36.25 lakhs in cash and ₹8.75 by way of a self-cheque.
4.
Admittedly, the petitioner has joined the investigation. This Court is also informed that considerable progress has been made in this regard. Insofar as the land is concerned, the learned counsel appearing for the Committee constituted by the Supreme Court states that land in question has been sold by the Committee to another purchaser and the prior transaction in this regard entered into by the petitioner has been set aside. 5.
Investigation has progressed and the petitioner's presence is not immediately required for further investigations. There also appears to be no apprehension regarding the petitioner influencing any witness or avoiding the process of law. This is apparent since the said FIR was filed almost twelve years ago and much of the investigation in this regard is already over. 6.
Considering the above, this Court considers it apposite to allow the present petition.
7.
The petitioner is granted bail subject to the petitioner furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹50,000/- with one surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned trial court. This is also subject to the additional condition that the petitioner shall join the investigation and also appear before the concerned courts as and when called upon to do so. The petitioner shall deposit his passport, if any, with the concerned Trial Court and not leave the country without the concerned Trial Court's approval.
8.
The petition is allowed in the aforesaid terms. 9.
Order dasti.
VIBHU BAKHRU, J OCTOBER 09, 2019 pkv