← Library
High Court of Punjab and HaryanaCRM-M/46748/2019dismissed

Rambir v. State Of Haryana

2019-11-02Mr. Justice Surinder Gupta2 pages

CRM-M-46748-2019 -1-

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH.

Crl. Misc. No.M-46748 of 2019 (O&M) Date of Decision: November 02, 2019 Rambir ......PETITIONER(s).

VERSUS

State of Haryana ....RESPONDENT(s).

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURINDER GUPTA

Present:

Mr. Ravinder Phogat, Advocate for the petitioner (s).

******* SURINDER GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition has been filed under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.51 dated 27.02.2019 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 120-B, 403, 406, 409, 420, 465, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code, at Police Station Dadri City, District Charkhi Dadri. Heard.

As per case of the prosecution an amount of `8,56,000/- was wrongly got deposited in the account of M/s Shri Ram Enterprises of which, petitioner is proprietor. He later withdrew this amount despite the fact that no payment was due from the Public Health Engineering Division, Charkhi Dadri towards M/s Shri Ram Enterprises.

It is evident from the facts that cheque was in fact, issued for payment to Mr. Vikas Kumar Badesara and by interpolation, payment of this SACHIN MEHTA 2019.11.02 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh

CRM-M-46748-2019 -2cheque was taken by petitioner in the account of M/s Shri Ram Enterprises and in connivance with other employees of the department, another cheque bearing No.44191 dated 26.06.2012 was issued in the name of Vikas Kumar Badesara for payment of `8,56,000/- by mentioning in the record that earlier cheque was cancelled as not being honoured. The petitioner is direct beneficiary of this entire transaction and his custodial interrogation is required to find the true facts.

Keeping in view the above facts and circumstance, I do not find any reason to exercise the discretionary power of this Court to extend the benefit of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. This petition has no merits. Dismissed.

( SURINDER GUPTA ) November 02, 2019 JUDGE Sachin M.

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes/No Whether Reportable:

Yes/No SACHIN MEHTA 2019.11.02 14:21 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document High Court, Chandigarh