Karam Chand vs State of Haryana

Mehinder Singh Sullar, J.—Petitioner Karam Chand son of Narata Ram, has preferred the instant petition for the grant of concession of anticipatory bail, in a case registered against him along with his other co-accused Mohan Lal s/o Amrik Singh etc., vide FIR No. 66 dated 29.5.2014, on accusation of having committed the offences punishable under sections 420 and 406 IPC by the police of Police Station Sadar Jagadhri, Distt. Yamuna Nagar.

Notice of the petition was issued to the State.

After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, going through the record with their valuable help and considering the entire matter deeply, to my mind, there is no merit in the present petition in this regard.

Ex-facie, the argument of learned counsel that since the petitioner has been falsely implicated by the complainant in the present case, so, he is entitled to the concession of pre-arrest bail, sans merit.

The pith and substance of the prosecution version, inter-alia, is that petitioner Karam Chand was working as Clerk, whereas his co-accused Mohan Lal was working as Cashier in Punjab National Bank, Jagadhri. According to the prosecution that complainant Amrik Singh s/o Gian Chand (for brevity "the complainant") has asked the accused to add the name of his wife Mahender Kaur in his joint account as he wanted to deposit the amount in their name in the bank. The accused induced him that Punjab National Bank, Jagadhri Branch was giving very less interest and he should invest money in the fixed deposit (for short "FD") in Yamuna Nagar Punjab National Bank, New Market, Yamuna Nagar, which would pay him interest at the rate of 15% and he will collect money from his residence. Believing the accused, the complainant paid Rs. 21/2 lacs, vide receipt No. 6420, FD No. 6698 of Rs. 5 lacs, FD No. 6691 of Rs. 3 lacs, FD No. 6697 of Rs. 5 lacs, FD No. 6692 of Rs. 21/2 lacs, FD Nos. 7029 to 7034 & 7038 of Rs. 1 lac each to them on different occasions. Not only that, they have also fraudulently collected the amount from S/Shri Balbir Singh and Jasvir Singh sons of Mukhtiar Singh as well on the same pretext. The complainant claimed that on maturity, when he went to the bank to get the amount encashed, then, both the accused met and promised him to return the entire amount after 30.4.2014, but in vain.

Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events in detail in the FIR, in all, the prosecution claimed that the accused have hatched a criminal conspiracy, prepared false FDRs in the name of indicated fake bank and duped the innocent persons in lacs of rupees in the manner depicted here-in-above.

Meaning thereby, very direct and serious allegations are assigned to the petitioner that he and his co-accused have hatched a criminal conspiracy, prepared false FDRs in the name of indicated fake bank, duped the innocent persons and misappropriated the amount of Rs. 66 lacs. In this manner, the petitioner has received a huge amount from the complainant & other victims and misappropriated the pointed amount, which is yet to be recovered. Even he has not returned the amount to them. Not only that, the learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Shamsher Singh, has submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender. The accused have also cheated other persons and similar nature of criminal cases are pending against them. The police has yet to interrogate the petitioner and to collect evidence. To me, his custodial interrogation is necessary to remove the curtain and unearth the scam. In case, he is allowed the concession of pre-arrest bail, then, the police will be deprived to recover huge indicated amount, FDRs/forged documents, other case property, ascertain modus operandi of the petitioner, his involvement in other such scam and effective investigation. It would naturally adversely affect & weaken the case of the prosecution, which, to my mind, is not legally permissible. Therefore, he is not entitled to the concession of anticipatory bail in the obtaining circumstances of the case.

Moreover, it is now well settled principle of law that the order of anticipatory bail cannot be allowed to circumvent normal procedure of arrest, recovery of case property from the main accused and investigation by the police. The Court has also to see that the investigation is in the province of the police and an order of anticipatory bail should not operate as an inroad into the statutory investigational powers of the police, in exercising the judicial discretion in granting the anticipatory bail. Sequelly, the Court should not be unmindful of the difficulties likely to be faced by the investigating agency and the public interest likely to be affected thereby.

In the light of aforesaid reasons, taking into consideration the seriousness of allegations of cheating & misappropriation of the amount in question against him and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the case of either side during the course of trial of main case, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant petition for pre-arrest bail filed by the petitioner is hereby dismissed as such.

Needless to mention that nothing observed, here-in-above, would reflect, on merits of the main case, in any manner, during the trial, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petition for anticipatory bail only.