Honey Kumar vs State of Punjab

Ram Chand Gupta, J.—The present petition has been filed for anticipatory bail u/s 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR no. 67 dated 17.08.2009, under Sections 420/409/467/468/120B IPC, registered at police station Boha, District Mansa. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the whole record including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Mansa dismissing anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of the petitioner.

Vide order dated 24.08.2011 passed by coordinate Bench of this Court, petitioner was directed to join the investigation and he was granted interim bail to the satisfaction of arresting officer in case of arrest.

It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner that he has already joined the investigation pursuant to said order. It is further contended that he is being involved in this case as his father, namely, Anil Kumar is the main accused and there are allegations that he in connivance with officers of the Bank had committed fraud with the Bank and misappropriated the money belonging to the Bank by getting the draft issued without making any payment.

State was directed to file a detail reply regarding allegation against the present petitioner-accused. Perusal of the reply shows that the only allegation against the present petitioner-accused is that he had moved an application before District Dairy Development, Mansa on 09.08.2007 for getting the name of firm registered in the name and style of Bishamber Dyal Honey Kumar and however, father of present petitioner was shown as proprietor of the firm. It has been contended that he has been involved in this case on the oral statements of the witnesses that he also used to visit the Bank and used to receive the drafts for without making payment through the Manager of the Bank. However, there is no document on record in this regard.

It has also been stated by learned counsel for the State, on investigation. It is further contended that main accused i.e. father of present petitioner has already been arrested and released on regular bail.

There are no allegations on behalf of the State that petitioner is likely to abscond or that he is likely to dissuade the witnesses from deposing true facts in the Court, if released on bail.

Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the anticipatory bail application filed on behalf of

Honey Kumar is accepted and order dated 24.08.2011 granting interim bail in favour of the petitioner is, hereby, made absolute subject to compliance of conditions specified u/s 438(2) Cr.P.C. The present petition stands disposed of accordingly.