Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Sh Tarun Ahuja vs State Of Govt Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 2 February, 2023

Author: Rajnish Bhatnagar

Bench: Rajnish Bhatnagar

                            $~25
                            *      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                            +      BAIL APPLN. 333/2023
                                   SH TARUN AHUJA                                        ..... Petitioner
                                                       Through:     Mr. Ashish Chauhan, Adv.

                                                       versus

                                   STATE OF GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI & ANR.                  ..... Respondents
                                                       Through:     Mr. Amit Ahlawat, APP for the State.
                                   CORAM:
                                   HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNISH BHATNAGAR
                                                  ORDER

% 02.02.2023 CRL.M.A. 2740/2023

1. Exemption allowed, subject to all just exception.

2. The application stands disposed of.

CRL.M.(BAIL) 158/2023

1. This is a petition filed by the petitioner under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 62/2022 under Sections 420/406/120B IPC registered at Police Station Barakhamba Road.

2. Issue notice. Learned APP for the State appears on advance notice and accepts notice.

3. It is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is a DSA and he has only introduced borrowers to the Bank and apart from this, he has no role in the entire disbursal of the loan by the complainant bank and he has been joining the investigation.

4. On the other hand, it is submitted by learned APP for the State that petitioner is one of the conspirator and he has received a sum of Rs. 24 lakhs into the Bank Account of Firm, namely, Finance Hub and a sum of Rs. 25 lakhs into the Bank Account of other Firm, namely, We Work and in total he has received a sum of Rs. 50 lakhs. It is further submitted by learned APP for the State, on instructions from the IO, that proprietor of Finance Hub is M. Muthu Rajan and his statement has been recorded. It is further submitted that as per the statements given by M. Muthu Rajan, the entire financial dealings of the firm were being looked after and undertaken by the petitioner. It is further submitted by learned APP for the State that proprietor of the other firm, namely, We Work is Riya Aggrawal and she has also been interrogated and during her interrogation, she stated that the petitioner, Tarun Ahuja, has helped her in procuring Rs. 25 lakhs from the loan amount disbursed by the complainant. It is further submitted that though petitioner has joined the investigation, he has not cooperated in the investigation.

5. It is further submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner has only been charged under Section 420 along with Section 120B IPC. He relied upon the Judgment passed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Satender Kumar Antil vs. Central Bureau of Investigation and Ors (MANU/SC/0851/2022) to bring home the point that the punishment under Sections 420/120B is only 7 years

6. On the contrary, it is submitted by learned APP for the State that the investigation is at its initial stage and the petitioner is not giving satisfactory replies and has not cooperated.

7. Let status report be filed on or before the next date of hearing.

8. Issue notice to respondent no. 2, on steps being taken by the petitioner by all possible modes, returnable on 28th February 2023.

RAJNISH BHATNAGAR, J FEBRUARY 2, 2023 p