Sunil Agarwal vs State of Jharkhand

Heard the parties through video conferencing.

Learned counsel for the petitioner personally undertakes to remove the defects as pointed out by the stamp reporter within two weeks after the lockdown period is over.

In view of the personal undertaking of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the defects pointed out by the stamp reporter are ignored for the present.

So far as the defect no. 9(ii) is concerned, the same is ignored. Apprehending his arrest in connection with Kenduadih P.S. Case No.97 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.3050 of 2016 instituted under Sections 406, 420, 120B, 467, 466, 471, 504, 506, 509 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, the petitioner has moved this Court for grant of privileges of anticipatory bail.

Heard the parties.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the allegation against the petitioner is that the petitioner on behalf of Waris Finance International Co. Ltd. has misappropriated crores of rupees of various persons. It is submitted that the allegations against the petitioner are all false. It is then submitted that the petitioner is no way concerned either with the Waris Finance Company or with the Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd. in any manner and he has been implicated in this case due to the only reason that in the year 2012 the father of the petitioner along with his brothers entered into an agreement with the Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd in which the petitioner was a witness. It is next submitted that the Central Bureau of Investigation conducted investigation with respect to the offence committed by Waris Finance Company, the father of the petitioner was summoned by the Central Bureau of Investigation under Section 91 Cr.P.C. for furnishing relevant documents. It is further submitted that the petitioner is no way associated in any manner with the ownership of the said the Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd and only because he was a witness in the agreement entered into between his father, his father's brothers and the Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd and in terms of the said agreement Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd. has forfeited some amount to the father of the petitioner because of violation of the condition of the said agreement entered into between the father of the petitioner and Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd., the petitioner cannot be held liable for the debts, if any, of the Waris Hospital & Diagnostic Centre Ltd. It is lastly submitted that the co-accused -Sajjan Kumar Agarwal @ Sajan Kumar Agarwal has already been given the privilege of anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 23.01.2020, passed in A.B.A. No. 7108 of 2019. Hence it is submitted that the petitioner be also given the privilege of anticipatory bail.

Considering the submissions of learned counsels and the facts and circumstances stated above, I am inclined to grant privileges of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Accordingly, the petitioner is directed to surrender in the Court of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad within six weeks from today and in the event of his arrest or surrendering, he will be enlarged on bail on furnishing bail bond of Rs.25,000/- (Twenty five thousand) with two sureties of the like amount each to the satisfaction of learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Dhanbad in connection with Kenduadih P.S. Case No.97 of 2016 corresponding to G.R. No.3050 of 2016 with the condition that he will co-operate with the investigation of the case and appear before the investigating officer as and when noticed by him and furnish his mobile number and photocopy of the Aadhar Card with an undertaking that he will not change his mobile number during the pendency of the case and subject to the conditions as laid down under Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.