Delhi High Court - Orders
Mohit vs State (Nct Of Delhi) on 12 December, 2022
Author: Swarana Kanta Sharma
Bench: Swarana Kanta Sharma
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 3121/2022
MOHIT ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Pankaj Srivastav, Mr. Varmika
Singh and Mr. Rishabh Verma,
Advocates
versus
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) ..... Respondent
Through: Mr. Manoj Pant, APP for the State
with ASI Jitender Singh.
CORAM:
HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
ORDER
% 12.12.2022 BAIL APPLN. 3121/2022 & CRL.M.(BAIL) 1287/2022 (for interim protection)
1. The present application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ("Cr.P.C.") has been filed by the petitioner seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR bearing No. 141/2022, registered at Police Station ("PS") Crime Branch for the offences punishable under Sections 419/420/468/471/34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 ("IPC") and against the impugned order dated 08.09.2022 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge -04 ("ASJ"), North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi.
2. The brief facts of the case are that on 05.07.2022, a secret information was received at ER-1, Crime Branch that a person in the name of Rahul Mittal is cheating innocent people in Delhi as well as in other parts of the Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:16.12.2022 12:05:21 country in the name of reviving dump insurance policies, opening new insurance policies and providing loan on the insurance policies. It was informed that Rahul Mittal has opened fake accounts with the help of his associates in which the money is deposited and withdrawn. Accused Rahul Mittal has cheated a number of persons all over India on the pretext of insurance policies. It was also informed that Rahul Mittal arranges fictitious SIM cards used to make calls to the targeted persons and other co-accused also keep record of targeted persons in the laptop and mobile phones. It was also informed those people were operating from some unknown place located in Rohini, Delhi.
3. On 14.07.2022, the information was received that one of the members of the racket namely Shafez would come to meet someone near Delight Cinema, Darya Ganj carrying some forged documents to open accounts to transfer the accumulated cheating amount. A raid was conducted and Shafez was apprehended. Some forged documents i.e., a PAN card in the name of Pawan Kumar having photo of accused Shafez, some ATM cards and a mobile phone were recovered from the possession of Shafez. The WhatsApp chats between accused Shafez and other co-accused were found in the mobile phone which was recovered from Shafez. Shafez was also operating an account at Axis Bank in the name of Deep Chand Rai. At the instance of accused Shafez, accused Rahul Mittal was apprehended from Rithala Metro Station, where they were supposed to meet. Thereafter, accused Rahul Mittal was interrogated and one mobile phone was recovered from his possession as well, which was being used to call the targeted person. Thereafter, co-accused Sujeet was also apprehended and one mobile phone and a laptop used in the commission of offence were recovered from his Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:16.12.2022 12:05:21 instance as well.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner states that all allegations are against the co-accused persons and applicant is only named in the disclosure statement of co-accused and his name is nowhere mentioned in the original FIR. It is further stated that learned Trial Court had granted interim protection to the applicant and after getting bail petitioner had joined the investigation six times. It is further stated that he was working as an employee and is not a part of the conspiracy. Learned Counsel also states that co-accused namely Sujeet and Manoj, whose role was clearly mentioned in the FIR in question, were granted bail.It is also stated by learned counsel for petitioner that due to the pendency of the present bail application, petitioner is unable to get proper treatment. Therefore, anticipatory bail be granted to the petitioner.
5. On the other hand, learned APP for the State has strongly opposed the present bail application stating that there are specific allegations against the applicant. It is stated that there are chats between the applicant and co- accused which proves that applicant along with accused persons had duped the innocent persons. It is further stated that applicant had joined the investigation but did not co-operate at the time of interrogation. It is further stated that at the time of interrogation, applicant did not submit his mobile phone which he was using and contained vital evidence against him.
6. It is submitted by learned APP for the State that several raids were conducted to arrest the applicant but he has been evading his arrest and absconding. On 12.10.2022, charge sheet has already been filed in the present case and the process under Section 82 Cr.P.C. was issued against the applicant.
Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:16.12.2022 12:05:217. I have heard arguments on behalf of both the parties and have gone through the material on record.
8. It is settled law that at the time of granting bail the Court should consider (i) nature of seriousness of the offence; (ii) character of the evidence and circumstances which are peculiar to the accused; and (iii) likelihood of the accused fleeing from justice; (iv) the impact that this release may make on the prosecution witnesses, its impact on the society; and (v)likelihood of his tampering with evidence. The Hon'ble Supreme Court reiterated the same in Kamla Devi v. State of Rajasthan and Another, (2022) 6 SCC 725.
9. Having considered the respective submissions of learned counsel for applicant and learned APP for the State, this Court is of the opinion that in the present case, the allegations against the applicant are serious in nature as the applicant along with co-accused forged the documents and cheated the innocent persons on the pretext of reviving dump insurance policies, opening new insurance policies and providing loan on the insurance policies. A perusal of the Status Report as well as impugned order dated 08.09.2022 reveals that during investigation, some of the victims were contacted, who were cheated by the accused persons including the present applicant and the victims had stated about the cheating done by the applicant along with the co-accused persons. It is noted that accused Rahul Mittal disclosed that he was running the racket since the year 2017 and a sum of Rs. 1 Crore approx. was cheated by them. It was further noted that accused Manoj Kumar provided four fictitious accounts to accused Shafez in which cheated amount was deposited. A sum of Rs.86,000/-, a debit card in the name of Neeraj Kumar and two mobile phones were recovered from the possession of Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:16.12.2022 12:05:21 accused Manoj. The chats between accused Manoj and Shafez were recovered from that mobile phone.
10. During investigation, accused Rahul Mittal and Sujeet have disclosed the name of applicant/accused Mohit as one of their associates stating that applicant had arranged fake SIM cards which were used in calling the victims. The CDR of mobile numbers shows the connectivity of applicant with other co-accused persons and the chats between applicant and other co- accused persons have also been retrieved from their mobile phones.
11. A perusal of the chats, which were handed over by learned APP for the State in the Court, show that applicant had conversation regarding fake SIM cards, payments and fake accounts with co-accused namely Shafez. It is noticed from the chats that applicant had asked the co-accused about the SIM card and if some problem is faced while using the SIM card (fake SIM) then co-accused should inform him. It is further noted from the chats that accused persons are using an account in the name of one Deep Chand Rai whose details are also mentioned and most of the payments were received in the account of Deep Chand Rai.
12. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and the fact that proceedings under Section 82 of Cr.P.C. have been initiated against the applicant, no ground is made out for grant of anticipatory bail.
13. Accordingly, the present bail application stands dismissed along with pending application.
14. The order be uploaded on the website forthwith.
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA, J DECEMBER 12, 2022/zp Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:ZEENAT PRAVEEN Signing Date:16.12.2022 12:05:21