Delhi High Court - Orders
Shakir@Pehalwan vs The State (Nct Of Delhi) on 6 April, 2022
Author: Talwant Singh
Bench: Talwant Singh
$~31
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 784/2022
SHAKIR@PEHALWAN ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Rashid Khan, Advocate.
versus
THE STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP with SI
Sunny Kumar, P.S. Maurya Enclave.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE TALWANT SINGH
ORDER
% 06.04.2022
1. The petitioner has filed the present application praying for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 1236/2021 registered with PS Maurya Enclave under Section 379/420/34 IPC. The earlier anticipatory bail application moved by the present petitioner was dismissed by the Addl. Sessions Judge (ASJ) on 23.02.2022.
2. The background of this matter is that this FIR was registered on the complaint of an official from SBI Bank, who had stated that the ATM Machines attached with the Bank had shown a loss of about Rs. 6 lakhs from 19.11.2021 till the filing of the complaint.
2.1. On analysis of the CCTV footage of the ATM Machines, it was found that some unknown persons were physically controlling the shutter of the ATM Machines while making the transaction, due to which error was shown BAIL APPLN. 784/2022 Page 1 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MAMTA RANI Signing Date:11.04.2022 16:55 in the logs of the ATM Machines but persons were able to withdraw the cash from the ATM machine.
2.2. On the basis of the CCTV footage, one person named Rahul Khan was apprehended inside the ATM Booth while he was making the transaction in the similar manner.
2.3. During investigation, accused Rahul Khan was arrested and he disclosed the name of present applicant and one Sohail. The photographs of the accused Rahul Khan were sent to the FSL to match the same with the CCTV footage of the ATM Booth.
2.4. Due to the modus operandi adopted by the accused persons, the bank was suffering double loss as accused were physically controlling the shutter of the ATM Machine, therefore, the error in transaction was shown and the amount was automatically credited in the account of alleged person from the central pool account of the Bank and on the other side accused physically took the cash from the ATM Machine.
2.5. The case was investigated and after completion of investigation charge-sheet under Section 379/420/34 IPC was filed. The petitioner was shown in column No. 11 along-with Rahul Khan. The main accused was granted bail by the learned ACMM on 23.02.2022, but the anticipatory bail moved by the present accused/applicant was dismissed by the learned ASJ.
3. Being aggrieved, the present anticipatory bail application has been moved. Status report has been filed.
4. The status report discloses that after arrest of accused Rahul Khan, he was interrogated and he discloses the names of his associates namely Shakir @ Pehalwan (the present applicant) and Sohail, the present applicant BAIL APPLN. 784/2022 Page 2 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MAMTA RANI Signing Date:11.04.2022 16:55 absconded. The CCTV footage of the ATM Booths, Electronic Journal records, ATM Machine records; Branch Journal Ledger and account statements of the alleged transactions were obtained. The investigation done so far, concluded that accused Rahul Khan along-with present applicant targeted various ATM Machines in Delhi. They used to withdraw cash from recycler ATM Machines by physically controlling the shutter of the ATM Machines, due to which the ATM Machines show error in the transactions and due to the error in logs of the ATM Machines, the error amounts were automatically credited into the accounts of alleged persons from the central pool of the bank. The accused persons physically took the cash from the ATM Machines and later on the amount was also credited in their accounts. The accused Rahul Khan was caught red-handed by the bank staff. After investigation, charge-sheet was filed against accused Rahul Khan. 4.1. NBWs were issued against the present applicant, which could not be executed hence, proceedings under Section 82 Cr.P.C. have been initiated against him. The present accused was seen in the CCTV footage and his photographs were obtained and sent to FSL, Rohini to match the same with the CCTV footage. The present accused/applicant has previous involvements as per the report received from the police station Sadar, Nuh, Haryana. He is stated to be involved in the following cases :
(i) FIR No. 605/2015 dated 15.09.2015, u/s 148/149/341/323/325 IPC registered with PS Sadar, Nuh, Haryana
(ii) FIR No. 500/2017 dated 11.07.2017 u/s 25/54/59, Arms Act. registered with PS Sadar, Nuh, Haryana
(iii) FIR No. 315/2017 u/s 420/406/120B IPC registered with PS BAIL APPLN. 784/2022 Page 3 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MAMTA RANI Signing Date:11.04.2022 16:55
(iv) Sadar, Nuh, Haryana
(v) FIR No. 302/2019 u/s 399, 402 IPC 25/54/59 Arms Act, registered with PS Sadar, Nuh, Haryana 4.2. The photographs of the accused obtained from the CCTV footage of the ATM Booths have also been enclosed with the status report. The anticipatory bail of the application of the present accused was dismissed on 23.02.2022 on the ground that the present accused was seen in the CCTV footage of the ATM Booth and he has been identified as the same person on the basis of the photographs obtained from the accused Rahul Khan, so it was submitted that no ground was made out to grant him pre-arrest protection.
5. I have heard arguments from both sides.
5.1. The photograph of the present applicant was obtained from mobile phone of the co-accused Rahul Khan, which matches with his photographs captured in CCTV footage of ATM Booths. As per the State, the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is required to know the modus operandi and other details regarding the ATM transactions, which have caused a loss of Rs. 8.57 Lakhs to the bank in total 88 transactions by using 28 different Debit Cards.
5.2. In my opinion, to unearth the unique modus operandi adopted by the accused persons, including the present applicant, the custodial interrogation of the present applicant is warranted to work out the details of the entire racket, which was being run by the accused persons. His prima-facie involvement in the present case is shown on the basis of his photographs obtained from the CCTV footage of the ATM Booth. The accused has BAIL APPLN. 784/2022 Page 4 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MAMTA RANI Signing Date:11.04.2022 16:55 number of cases registered against him. He is absconding from his regular place of abode and NBWs were issued against him and despite best efforts, the police was not able to arrest him and Section 82 Cr.P.C. proceedings have already been initiated against him, which are likely to be completed soon.
6. Keeping all these facts in view, applicant is not entitled to the anticipatory bail; hence, the application for anticipatory bail moved by the present applicant is hereby dismissed.
TALWANT SINGH, J APRIL 6, 2022/mr Click here to check corrigendum, if any BAIL APPLN. 784/2022 Page 5 of 5 Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:MAMTA RANI Signing Date:11.04.2022 16:55