Ajay @ Babloo v. State Of Haryana

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT

CHANDIGARH Decided on: 26.11.2019 Ajay @ Babloo ....Petitioner

Versus

State of Haryana ....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN Present :

Mr. Vikram Singh, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Naveen Sheoran, DAG, Haryana.

ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J. (Oral) The petitioner prays for grant of regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (in short 'Cr.P.C.') in FIR No.195 dated 25.06.2019, for offence punishable under Sections 409, 420, 467, 471 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC') registered at Police Station Asauda, District Jhajjar. Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the FIR has been registered at the instance of the Block Development and Panchayat Officer, Bahadurgarh with the allegation that Pardeep Singh Gram Sachiv, Kheri Jassaur has reported him that the Bank Manager, Anil Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Kheri Jassaur and Ajay Ranga, Gram Sachiv, Block Bahadurgarh, in connivance with each other, have fraudulently withdrew huge amount from the Gram Panchayat Account maintained with Sarav Haryana Gramin Bank. It is further stated in the FIR that on inspection, it is found that Anil Kumar, Sarpanch Kheri Jassaur and Ajay Ranga, Gram Sachiv, who was not the Secretary of the

Gram Panchayat Kheri Jassaur, in connivance with each other, have prepared a false resolution and by submitting the same to the Bank, showing Ajay Ranga as Secretary of Village Kheri Jassaur and by forging the signatures of the complainant regarding the verification of Ajay Ranga and Anil Kumar Sarpanch, have embezzled 14-15 crores of rupees. It is further argued that during the investigation, the police arrested one Satpal @ Kala and on his disclosure statement, the name of the present petitioner has been surfaced in the FIR. Counsel for the petitioner has also submitted that the petitioner is not concerned with the dealing and working of the Gram Panchayat of the village. It is also argued that the primary allegations are regarding two resolutions, which were prepared by Anil Kumar and Ajay Ranga.

It is further submitted that the investigation is complete and the petitioner is in custody since 20.07.2019; challan stands presented and the conclusion of the trial will take some time as the offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate, therefore, the petitioner may be granted the concession of regular bail. Counsel for the State, on instructions from ASI Azad Singh, has argued that an amount of Rs.1.40 crores was recovered from the office of Shivam Builders Company at the instance of the petitioner. In reply, counsel for the petitioner has argued that the Shivam Builders Company is owned by the co-accused Satpal @ Kala and the amount was credited to his account from where it was recovered.

However, this fact is disputed by the Investigating Officer present in the Court, who has stated that Shivam Builders Company is

owned by the present petitioner.

Without commenting anything on merits of the case, considering the fact that the petitioner is not involved in any other case; he is in custody since 20.07.2019; challan stands presented and the conclusion of the trial is likely to take some time as the offences are triable by the Court of Magistrate, the present petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail subject to furnishing bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court/Illaqa Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

However, it will be open for the prosecution to apply for cancellation of bail, if the petitioner is found involved misusing the concession of bail, in any manner.

(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN) JUDGE 26.11.2019 yakub Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether reportable:

Yes/No