Pramod Kumar Singh vs State Of H.P on 20 December, 2019

[Cites 6, Cited by 0]

Himachal Pradesh High Court

Pramod Kumar Singh vs State Of H.P on 20 December, 2019

Bench: Jyotsna Rewal Dua

    IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH,
                    SHIMLA
                           Cr.M.P.(M) No.2151 of 2019
                           Decided on: 20.12.2019




                                                                           .
    Pramod Kumar Singh         ......petitioner/applicant





                                         Versus
    State of H.P.                                  ...... respondent/non-applicant





    ................................................................................................
    Coram
    The Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge.
    Whether approved for reporting?1

    For the petitioner :

     For the respondent :
                          r               to  Mr. Kush Sharma, Advocate.

                                              Mr. Anil Jaswal,
                                              Advocate General.
                                                                               Additional

                                              Sub. Inspector Dharam Singh , SHO
                                              Anni.


    Jyotsna Rewal Dua, J (Oral)

Petitioner sought anticipatory bail in FIR No.57/2019 dated 15.6.2019, under Section 418, 419, 420, 467,468 and 34 of Indian Penal Code, registered at Police Station Luhri, Anni, District Kullu. Interim protection was granted to the petitioner vide order 22.11.2019, subject to the conditions stipulated therein. Fresh status report stands filed.

2. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and gone through the record. In my considered view, the interim protection granted to the petitioner on 22.11.2019, deserves to be made absolute for the following reasons:- as per the status report, complaint was lodged by one Sachin 1 Whether reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment?

::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2019 20:31:15 :::HCHP 2

Gupta, on 13.6.2019, to the effect that he had advanced an amount of Rs.2,51,000/- to M/s Lizza Consumer Goods Pvt. Ltd for procuring certain .

goods; bail petitioner is Director of this company; the goods were not dispatched to the complainant despite repeated requests; complainant pressed for refund of money back from the petitioner and also to take action against the wrongdoers for harassing him, whereafter instant FIR No.57/2019 was registered under Section 418, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 34 of Indian Penal Code. As per status report, complainant had credited a sum of Rs.11,000/- and Rs.2,40,000/-, via NEFT on 9.5.2019 and 14.05.2019, respectively to M/s Lizza Consumer Goods Pvt. Ltd; neither the amount has been refunded to the complainant, nor the supply order against which the amount was credited has been honoured.

3. It has been submitted in the bail petition that the goods were actually sent to the complainant against the supply order, but the complainant returned the goods back without assigning any reasons, whereafter the supply order was diverted to some other place. It has been further averred that the bail petitioner has intention to repay the amount to the complainant. The present dispute appears to be more of civil nature at this stage. It is not in dispute that the bail petitioner pursuant to the direction issued by this Court on 22.11.2019, has joined the investigation and is cooperating with the investigating agency. Therefore, no fruitful purpose would be served by sending the petitioner in judicial custody at this stage.

Accordingly, interim protection ordered on 22.11.2019 is made absolute. It is ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2019 20:31:15 :::HCHP 3 ordered that in the event of arrest of the petitioner, in aforementioned FIR, he shall be released on bail on his furnishing personal bond in the sum of .

Rs.50.000/- (rupees Fifty thousand only) with one local surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer, subject to following conditions:-

1. Petitioner will join the investigation of case as and when called for by the Investigating Officer in accordance with law. It is made clear that in case petitioner fails to join the investigation of the case and does not cooperate with the investigating agency, then his bail is liable to be cancelled. It is open for the Investigating Agency to move appropriate application in that regard.

2. Petitioner will not leave India without prior permission of the Court.

3. Petitioner shall not temper with the evidence or hamper the investigation

4. Petitioner will not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or promise to the Investigating Officer or any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or Court.

5. In case the petitioner is put to trial, then he shall appear before the Court and shall furnish fresh bail bonds to the satisfaction of the Court.

It shall be open for the prosecution to move for cancellation of the bail in case the petitioner abuses the liberty granted and breaches the conditions of bail. Any observation ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2019 20:31:15 :::HCHP 4 hereinabove shall not be taken as an expression on merits of the case and learned Trial Court shall decide the matter uninfluenced by any of observations made hereinabove. Accordingly, this petition .

stands allowed in above terms.

Copy dasti.

(Jyotsna Rewal Dua) Judge 20.12.2019 (Rohit) ::: Downloaded on - 20/12/2019 20:31:15 :::HCHP

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

Himachal Pradesh High Court