Khushwant Singh vs State Of Uttarakhand

Vivek Bharti Sharma, J

Applicant Khushwant Singh, who is in judicial custody in Case Crime/FIR No.12 of 2023, under Sections 420, 506 of IPC, Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, has sought his release on bail.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the material available on file.

Learned counsel for the applicant would submit that the case of the applicant/accused is similar to that of his wife Kirandeep Kaur and father-in-law Manmohan Singh, who have already been granted bail; that, in the bail order of co-accused Manmohan Singh, it has been observed by this Court in para 4 that the counsel for the State is unable to tell if there is any evidence of office of that co-accused and another co-accused persons was ever been searched and anything was found against him; that, the offence is triable by Magistrate; that, the applicant is languishing in jail since 06.01.2023 and is entitled to bail on the ground of parity.

Per contra, Mr. Deepak Bisht, AGA along with Ms. Mamta Joshi, Brief Holder and S.H.O. Police Station Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar would submit that the applicant/accused is the main conspirator in this criminal conspiracy; that, there are six cases registered against the applicant/accused in P.S. Rudrapur, District Udham Singh Nagar, including the present one, out of which in one case final report has been submitted. The details of the other five cases are as under:-

i. FIR No.142/2020 under Section 420 IPC (final report filed)

ii. FIR No.10/2023 under Sections 420, 406, 468, 471 IPC (the amount alleged to have been cheated is Rs.14,20,000/-).

iii. FIR No.11/2023 under Sections 420, 406, 467, 471, (the amount alleged to have been cheated is Rs.9,70,000/-).

iv. FIR No.262/2023 under Section 420 IPC, (the amount alleged to have been cheated is Rs.7,50,000/-).

v. FIR No.606 of 2023 under Sections 420, 467, 406, 471 and 120-B IPC (the amount alleged to have been cheated is Rs.14,20,000/-).

State counsel along with S.H.O. would further submit that the modus operandi of the applicant/accused in almost all the above cases used to be that they used to open the account in the name of the person, who had contacted them for student visa and in account opening form the proposer generally used to be the present applicant/accused and the email used to be stated that of the applicant/accused and his company (bararoverseasrdp@gmail.com) and the mobile number in that account opening form generally used to be that of either the applicant/accused or some other co-accused person.

He would further submit that the evidence of one witness i.e. PW1 Mangal Singh has been recorded in the trial court on 07.10.2023 and he has reiterated the same allegations as stated by him in his statement recorded during the investigation under Section 161 Cr.P.C.

S.H.O. Mr. Vikram Rathod is present before the Court and would submit that this case was investigated by the I.O, who has since been transferred and he has presently no information if the bank Manager is the witness in this case and his statement was recorded and the account opening form was taken for the purpose of investigation and made part of the charge sheet. He would further submit that he will do needful as per the procedures of law.

Having considered the rival submissions of counsel for respective parties, without expressing any opinion about final merits of the case before the Trial Court, in the considered view of this Court, the applicant/accused does not deserve bail at this stage.

The bail application is, accordingly, rejected.