Deepak Mor v. State Of Haryana

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, at Chandigarh Criminal Misc. No. M-29037 of 2017 Date of Decision: 11.08.2017 Deepak Mor ... Petitioner(s)

Versus

State of Haryana ... Respondent(s) CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Shekher Dhawan.

Present:

Mr. Ram Kumar Saini, Advocate for the petitioner(s).

Shekher Dhawan, J.

Present petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 560 dated 20.12.2016, registered under Section 420 IPC and Section 66-D of the Information Technology Act, 2008 at Police Station Udyog Vihar, Gurugram.

Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that petitioner has been falsely implicated in this case. He had left the company in the year 2016 and thereafter in the month of December, 2016 i.e. after a period of three months of quitting the job, the complainant-company pointed out some irregularities and at that time, petitioner was made to sign on blank papers and those have been misused.

Notice of motion.

On asking of the Court, Mr. Surinder Pal Singh, Deputy Advocate General, Haryana, accepts notice on behalf of respondent. Learned counsel for the respondent-State contended that there is Deepak Kumar Bhardwaj 2017.08.11 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

Criminal Misc. No. M-29037 of 2017 absolutely no ground for releasing the petitioner on pre-arrest bail as he is involved in a case of fraud and embezzlement of huge amount and he would be required for custodial investigation.

Having considered the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties and having gone through the facts, this Court is of the considered view that the present petitioner was duly identified in CCTV footage. The allegations against the petitioner that while working with United Airlines, he made fraudulent refunds from five different associated ID's including his own. Refunds were processed from five associated IDs. Refunds were processed by replacing customers' cards with different debit/credit cards. Majority of these refunds were processed for additional services and petitioner accepted his involvement in the fraud by making statement and the entire matter requires custodial investigation. Hence, no case is made out for releasing the petitioner on pre-arrest bail and the present petition stands dismissed.

(Shekher Dhawan) Judge August 11, 2017 "DK"

Whether speaking/reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable : Yes/No Deepak Kumar Bhardwaj 2017.08.11 14:49 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document