Dimple Alias Dimpal v. State Of Punjab

2024:PHHC:059852 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Date of Decision: 01.05.2024 Dimple @ Dimpal ..................Petitioner

Versus

State of Punjab ................Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL

Present:

Mr. Ramesh Sharma, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Gauravdeep Singh Dhaliwal, AAG, Punjab.

FIR No.

Dated Police Station Section/s 21.07.2023 Raman, Bathinda 420, 120-B IPC GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.

1.

The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of aforementioned FIR.

2.

The FIR in question was lodged pursuant to a complaint filed by Buta Singh alongwith 7 more persons alleging therein that Sohan Lal Kamra, his wife Dimple (petitioner), Rajpal Singh, Gurdeep Singh, Sukhdeep Singh, Nirmal Singh, Tejinder Singh and two more persons in connivance with each other had opened 4 fake companies, namely, Noble Green Build Estate and Housing Development Private Limited, Kinoko Marketing Private Company Limited, Noble Agro Tech Katraket Farming Company and Noble Green Marketing Private Limited Company and by showing fake certificates

( 2 ) ) regarding registration of the said companies, had allured the applicants as well as 40-45 other persons to invest in the said companies and had, thus, defrauded gullible investors of an amount of Rs.1.5 crores approximately. 3.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that she has nothing to do with the said 4 companies and is not the Director of any of the said companies and has been implicated simply on account of the fact that she was wife of accused Sohan Lal. It has been submitted that the petitioner is a housewife and has not benefitted in any manner from the alleged investment made by the complainants and others.

4.

Opposing the petition, learned State counsel submits that not only the petitioner is specifically named in the FIR, but during the course of investigation sufficient evidence had been collected to establish the involvement of the petitioner in the entire scam and as a matter of fact she had deposited huge amounts in her bank account. It has also been submitted that the petitioner also stands involved in another FIR in the State of Rajasthan pertaining to commission of similar offence and as such, the petitioner cannot be said to be just a naive housewife, but is a seasoned criminal operating in connivance with other accused including her husband. 5.

This Court has considered rival submissions.

6.

The petitioner is specifically named in the FIR. During the course of investigation, the police has collected evidence to the effect that the said 4 companies were not registered with any authorized office of RBI or SEBI to undertake financial activities or to collect money for the purpose of investment, as was collected by the said companies. During investigation, statement of Account No.55151043997 maintained by the petitioner in State

( 3 ) ) Bank of India was collected indicating that cash deposits to the tune of Rs.22,35,049/- had been made by the petitioner. Still further, the police has also collected photographs taken at the time of meetings of the companies, which show that the petitioner had been actively participating and is seen handing over gifts to the persons while her husband is seen holding mike in his hand. Under these circumstances, where the involvement of the petitioner is, prima facie, evident and it is a scam pertaining to fraud of more than Rs.1.5 crores and the petitioner also happens to be involved in one more identical case, this Court does not find any special case for grant of anticipatory bail to petitioner.

7.

The petition is sans merit and is hereby dismissed. 01.05.2024 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL ) Vimal JUDGE Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No