Mohd Rasid v. State Of Haryana








 

 

  












 



 !

"#
$$%

&




& 
'


 


 #
( )
 $
&
$&$
 * )$
++++
 

 


 
  



 



Ms. Ruchi Sekhri, Addl. A.G., Haryana.

$&$
 * ),
$
- ).




 


!


 
"#$

Bharatiya Nagrik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 seeking regular bail for the petitioner in FIR No.504 dated 26.10.2023 under Sections 406, 420, 467, 468, 471 and 506 of IPC registered at Police Station Parao, District Ambala. Case of the prosecution is the petitioner alongwith his co-accused namely Rajesh Kumar have duped the complainant for an amount of Rs.24,20,000/- on the pretext of providing Class-III Govt. Jobs in the Department of Income Tax to Bhawna Rani and Davinder Singh, who are daughter and nephew of the complainant respectively. It is also stated that an amount of Rs.21,00,000/- was directly transferred into the account of the petitioner.

Even the appointment letters issued were found to be fake. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the present case. He further submits Davinder Kumar has already got registered an FIR against the petitioner on the same set of allegations, and as such, the institution of present FIR on the same set of allegations is clearly an abuse of process of law. He further submits that the petitioner is in custody for the last about one year and the trial is moving at a RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.02.

 

 

very slow pace as only three witnesses have been examined till date out of 18 cited prosecution witnesses.

On the other hand, learned State Counsel vehemently opposed the petition on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are very serious and grave in nature. She further submits that the petitioner is involved in six more cases of similar nature and out of them two cases have been registered in the State of U.P. and some of them have been registered in the State of Punjab. She further submits that the petitioner is a habitual offender and is indulged in cheating innocent people. Hence, learned State Counsel prayed for dismissal of the petition.

I have heard the learned counsel for the respective parties and have gone through the documents and other material available on record meticulously.

It is well settled principle of law that while considering a petition for regular bail, the Court must consider the prima facie case against the petitioner and the gravity of offence as well. Apparently, the petitioner is alleged to be involved in six more cases of similar nature. Meaning thereby, the petitioner is involved in the business of cheating innocent persons and grabbing their hard-earned money. Prima facie, the allegations against the petitioner are very serious. Furthermore, the petitioner is operating in other State(s) also. Hence, keeping in view the nature of offence and his involvement in various other cases of similar nature, this Court does not find any ground to grant the concession of regular bail to the petitioner at this stage. Dismissed.


-$&$
 * ).
'




,
%$
































 






      
    RAJENDER KUMAR 2026.02.20 16:57 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this order