High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/39733/2022allowed

Anurag v. State Of Haryana

2022-11-10Mr. Justice Gurvinder Singh Gill3 pages

In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana At Chandigarh Date of Decision : 10.11.2022 Anurag

...Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana

...Respondent

CORAM:

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL Present:- Ms. Ishita Jain, Advocate for the petitioner Mr. Rajiv Sidhu, DAG, Haryana assisted by SI Rampal Singh.

Mr. Ravinder Bangar, Advocate for the complainant. ***** GURVINDER SINGH GILL , J .(Oral) 1.

The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No. 98, dated 12.6.2022, Police Station Jathlana, District Yamuna Nagar, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 10 of the Immigration Act. 2.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion on 2.9.2022, the following order was passed :

"The petitioner has approached this Court seeking grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.98, dated 12.6.2022, Police Station Jathlana, District Yamuna Nagar, under Sections 420, 406, 506, 120-B of Indian Penal Code and Section 10 of Immigration Act. The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of complainant Pankaj Kumar, wherein it has been alleged that the petitioner alongwith other accused had defrauded the complainant of an amount of Rs.20 lakhs on the pretext of sending complainant's cousins namely Saurabh and Anil abroad.

( 2 ) Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that the petitioner has no role to play in the alleged fraud and that infact it is co-accused Balwant Singh, in whose bank account an amount of Rs.5 lakhs had been transferred, who can be held liable and that the allegations regarding the complainant having giving an amount of Rs.20 lakhs in cash to all accused cannot be said to be substantiated in any manner. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits the petitioner in any case, in order to prove his bonafides, is willing to deposit an amount of Rs.2 lakhs before the Trial Court within a period of 8 weeks from today. Notice of motion for 10.11.2022.

At this stage, Mr. Ravinder Bangar, Advocate has put in appearance on behalf of the complainant and has filed memorandum of appearance, which is taken on record. Power of Attorney be filed on or before the next date of hearing. Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, the petitioner be released on interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Arresting/Investigating Officer and shall abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

The aforesaid directions shall, however, be subject to the condition that the petitioner, as per his offer, shall deposit an amount of Rs.2 lakhs within a period of 8 weeks from today before the Trial Court. Upon deposit of such amount, the Trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate shall get the same invested in some FDR with some Nationalized Bank with a specific direction to Manager of the bank concerned not to entertain any request for encashment of the same except under orders of the Court. Upon the petitioner being declared innocent or being acquitted and such acquittal attains finality, the petitioner shall be entitled to proceeds of the said FDR. However, in case the petitioner is found guilty and is convicted and such conviction attains finality, the complainant shall be entitled to proceeds of the FDR in question." 3.

Learned State counsel has informed that pursuant to interim directions issued by this Court the petitioner has since joined investigation but have not fully cooperated inasmuch as he has not got the passports of the complainants recovered.

This Court has considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.

( 3 ) 5.

Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and also the nature of allegations and the fact that the petitioner has joined investigation, this Court is of the opinion that it is not a case where custodial interrogation would be warranted. Though, the learned State counsel has objected to the confirmation of bail on the ground that the petitioner has not got the passports of the complainants/victims recovered but the non-recovery of incriminating article at the instance of accused cannot be made a ground for denial of bail in every case inasmuch as forcing recovery of the same may virtually amount to forcing admission of guilt of the accused. 6.

At the time of issuance of notice of motion, the petitioner had offered to deposit an amount of Rs. 2 lacs to prove his bona fides, which already stands deposited.

In these circumstances, this Court is of the opinion that it is a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. The petition is accepted and the interim directions issued by this Court vide order dated 2.9.2022 are hereby made absolute, subject to the condition that the petitioner shall join investigation as and when called upon to do so and cooperate with the Investigating Officer and shall also abide by the conditions as provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C. 10.11.2022 ( Gurvinder Singh Gill ) kamal Judge Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No Whether Reportable Yes / No