Delhi High Court - Orders
Jaswant @ Jasmat vs State Of Nct Of Delhi on 27 January, 2022
Author: Chandra Dhari Singh
Bench: Chandra Dhari Singh
$~6
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+ BAIL APPLN. 4354/2021 & CRL.M.A 267/2022
JASWANT @ JASMAT ..... Petitioner
Through: Mr. Narendra Singh Hudda and
Mr. Ravi Kant Upadhyay, Advocates
versus
STATE OF NCT OF DELHI ..... Respondent
Through: Ms. Kusum Dhalla, APP
CORAM:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDRA DHARI SINGH
ORDER
% 27.01.2022
(THROUGH VIDEO CONFERENCING)
1. The instant bail application has been filed by the petitioner under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter "Cr.P.C.") seeking the following reliefs:-
"a) Allow the present application for grant of anticipatory bail and in the event of arrest direct the investigating agency to release the present applicant/petitioner forthwith.
b) That this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to direct the concerned SHO/IO/Arresting officer to release the applicant/petitioner on anticipatory bail in the event of his arrest in the present case, in the interest of justice.
c) And/or pass such other order/orders as this Hon'ble court may deem fit and proper in the facts and Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 4354/2021 Page 1 of 4 Signing Date:28.01.2022 17:04:33 circumstances of the present case."
2. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that the co-accused, Rahul, holding Passport No. U6532826 arrived from Moscow and during the process immigration clearance on arrival, it was found that the passenger had departed on 25th September 2021 from IGI Airport New Delhi for Dubai for tourism. During the scrutiny of Passport, it was found that there were 2 fake stamps dated 15th September 2020 (Departure-Chandigarh) and 28th August 2021 (Arrival-Chandigarh) on pages 30 and 29 which is not available in the immigration record. His original Passport No. U6532826 with Boarding Pass, Copy of pride and Passport, Camera images (departure and arrival), UCF details (departure and arrival) and copy of the fake stamps were handed over to Investigation Agency. Accordingly, FIR was registered against co-accused Rahul. He was arrested by the police in the present case and after his arrest he disclosed that he wanted to go abroad for seeking job, so he contacted Agent Jaswant Singh (petitioner herein) and a deal for sending him abroad had been fixed for Rs. 20,00,000/- (Rupees Twenty Lakhs Only). On 1st November 2021, co-accused Rahul left Dubai and reached Caracas via Moscow and Istanbul. At Caracas, Airport Authority denied his entry and sent him back to Moscow via Istanbul. Thereafter, he reached I.G.I. Airport, Delhi and during his interrogation with the police he disclosed that he had paid Rs. 5,00,000/- to the petitioner.
3. A notice under Section 41A Cr. P. C. dated 29th November 2021 was given to the petitioner whereby he had been directed to appear in person before the concerned Investigation Officer on 1st December 2021 but after Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 4354/2021 Page 2 of 4 Signing Date:28.01.2022 17:04:33 receiving notice, the petitioner went under trauma for which he visited Doctor who advised him not to travel at length and hence he had sent a reply to the Investigating Officer seeking exemption and praying for next date for his appearance. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioner submitted that since notice under Section 41 Cr.P.C. has already been issued, there is a great apprehension that the Investigating Agency may arrest the petitioner in the instant FIR. The petitioner is apprehending arrest also on the basis of the disclosure statement made by co-accused Rahul. It is submitted that the petitioner is a law-abiding citizen and allegation levelled against him are false and frivolous. The petitioner has nothing to do with the instant case and has been falsely implicated. Learned counsel submitted that petitioner is a permanent resident of Haryana and on instructions undertakes that petitioner shall abide by any condition imposed by the Court while granting bail and shall join investigation as and when required. It is informed by learned counsel that there are total seven cases against the petitioner, out of which he has already been acquitted in three cases and in remaining cases, he is on bail.
4. Per Contra, Ms. Kusum Dhalla, learned APP for the State vehemently opposed the instant bail application and submitted that the petitioner is a habitual offender involved in seven cases, out of which four cases are still pending. It is further submitted that he is not co-operating in the investigation and notice under Section 41A Cr.P.C. had already been issued and he has chosen not to appear before the Investigating Officer. Ms. Dhalla vehemently submitted that in light of these facts the instant anticipatory bail application moved by the Petitioner/Applicant is nothing but a gross misuse of the process of law. There are high chances that the petitioner will try to Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 4354/2021 Page 3 of 4 Signing Date:28.01.2022 17:04:33 hamper the investigation and might jump the bail, if enlarged by this Court. It is accordingly submitted that there is no ground available with the petitioner for invoking extraordinary jurisdiction of this Court. The instant petition is devoid of any merit and is liable to be dismissed.
5. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
6. This Court has perused the status report as well as the contentions made in the application. It is an admitted fact that the petitioner is involved in several other cases, in few of which investigation is still pending and are of similar nature. The allegations against the petitioner in the instant case are under Sections 420/468/471/120B of the Indian Penal Code read with Section 12 of Passport Act, which are serious in nature. It is noticed that despite having been released on bail in other cases, the petitioner is accused of committing similar offences while on bail.
7. Keeping in view the aforesaid facts and submissions as well as the strong opposition made on behalf of the State, this Court does not find any ground to allow the bail application. The same is accordingly dismissed.
CHANDRA DHARI SINGH, J JANUARY 27, 2022 Aj/@k Signature Not Verified Digitally Signed By:DAMINI YADAV BAIL APPLN. 4354/2021 Page 4 of 4 Signing Date:28.01.2022 17:04:33