Vikas Sharma v. State Of Punjab

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-26295 of 2018 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 11, 2018 Vikas Sharma

...Petitioner

VERSUS

State of Punjab

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE INDERJIT SINGH

Present:

Mr.Siddharth Gupta, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr.Pawan Sharda, Sr. DAG, Punjab for the respondent-State.

**** INDERJIT SINGH, J.

Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.0203 dated 07.05.2018 under Sections 419, 420, 409, 467, 468, 471 IPC, Sections 13(1) (a) and 13(1) (d) of Prevention of Corruption Act, registered at Police Station Civil Lines, Amritsar, District Police Commissionerate, Amritsar. Notice of motion was issued. Learned State counsel appeared and contested the petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. From the record, I find that the FIR has been registered on the application of Executive Engineer, Water Supply and Sanitation, Division Vineet Gulati 2018.07.13 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

CRM No.M-26295 of 2018 -2No.1, Amritsar against the present petitioner, who was Junior Assistant, for misappropriating and for committing fraud with the accounts of Cooperative Bank. There is allegation that present petitioner has forged the signatures of the Executive Engineer and embezzled a huge amount. Inspection of bank account was conducted and it was found that amounts of earnest money as well as many other amounts of the contractor, have since been withdrawn by the official of his own by appending forged and fabricated signatures of the Executive Engineer. Approximately, a sum of `15 lakhs has been misappropriated. 10 forged cheques were also found during investigation. Keeping in view the above facts and circumstances of the present case, serious allegations regarding misappropriation of the amounts and also in view of allegations of forging the documents and signatures of Executive Engineer, I find that petitioner is required for custodial interrogation and no ground is made out for granting anticipatory bail to him.

Therefore, finding no merit in the present petition, the same is dismissed.

However, nothing stated above, shall constitute my opinion on merits of the case.

July 11, 2018 (INDERJIT SINGH) Vgulati JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned Yes Whether reportable No Vineet Gulati 2018.07.13 16:50 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh