Punjab-Haryana High Court
Shamsher Singh vs State Of Haryana on 23 May, 2019
Author: Arvind Singh Sangwan
Bench: Arvind Singh Sangwan
CRM-M-12972-2019 -1-
WITH CRM-M-15089-2019
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
257 CRM-M-12972-2019
Date of decision : 23.05.2019
SHAMSHER SINGH
......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent
WITH CRM-M-15089-2019
Date of decision : 23.05.2019
SAT PAL
......Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HARYANA
...Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN
Present: Mr. Aditya Sanghi , Advocate
for the petitioner(s)
in CRM-M-12972-2019 .
Mr. Ramesh Kumar Dhaniaya, Advocate
for the petitioner(s)
in CRM-M-15089-2019.
Mr. Deepak Gerewal, DAG, Haryana
for the respondent-State assisted by HC-Raj Kumar.
*****
ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN, J (ORAL)
Reply by way of affidavit of Amarjeet Kataria, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hisar on behalf of respondent-State of Haryana in CRM-M-12972-2019 has been filed in the Court today. The same is taken on record.
Petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. for modification of orders dated 21.02.2019 (Annexure P-1) passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar has been filed vide which the Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar, while allowing the revision petition filed by the petitioner(s) for 1 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 00:28:50 ::: CRM-M-12972-2019 -2- WITH CRM-M-15089-2019 releasing the car bearing registration No. HR-32K-5249 in case titled as Shamsher Singh Vs. State of Haryana etc., (Hyundia Creta) and car No. HR20-AM-1062 in favour of the petitioner-Sat Pal, however a condition was laid down that both the petitioner(s) will furnish a bank guarantee of ` 8,00,000/- (rupees eight lakhs only) each for releasing the aforesaid vehicles on sapurdari.
Learned counsel for the petitioner(s) has argued that in fact the petitioner(s) are not in a position to furnish the guarantee on account of financial constraints and they are ready to furnish two solvent sureties of the equivalent amount and further submit that they will give undertaking before this Court that the registration certificate of the same vehicle(s) will remain in possession of the Court and petitioner(s) will not sell or alienate the cars by creating third-party interest.
Counsel for the petitioner also relied upon the judgment rendered in State of Kerala Vs. A.A. Ali, 2018(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 112., to submit that in similar case Hon'ble the Supreme Court of India has held that the Court should not insist for furnishing the bank guarantee in such like cases.
Learned State counsel on instructions from HC-Raj Kumar and on the basis of an affidavit filed in the Court by Amarjeet Kataria, HPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police, Hisar on behalf of respondent-State of Haryana in CRM-M-12972-2019 has submitted that the allegations on the petitioner(s) are that the company has cheated its depositors by inducing them that in case the depositors invest amount of ` 10,000/- then the 2 of 3 ::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 00:28:50 ::: CRM-M-12972-2019 -3- WITH CRM-M-15089-2019 company will pay an amount of ` 1500/- per week and thus there are direct allegations of cheating against them in the FIR and the fraud is for more than 118 crores.
I have heard the counsel for the parties and also gone through the record of the cases. I find that though vide impugned order the revisional Court has ordered for releasing of the vehicle(s) in superdari in favour of the petitioner(s) however has laid down a condition to furnish a bank guarantee of ` 8,00,000/- (rupees eight lakhs only) each.
In view of the judgment rendered in State of Kerala Vs. A.A. Ali (supra)., these petitions are partly allowed and it is directed that instead of furnishing bank guarantee of ` 8,00,000/- (rupees eight lakhs only) each, two solvent sureties of the equivalent amount will be furnished and the petitioners will hand-over the registration certificate with the Investigating Agency along with an undertaking that the registration certificate of the same vehicle(s) will remain in possession of the Court and petitioner(s) will not sell or alienate the cars by creating third-party interest during the pendency of the trial.
A photocopy of this order be placed on the files of other connected case.
(ARVIND SINGH SANGWAN)
JUDGE
23.05.2019
tarun
Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No
Whether reportable : Yes/No
3 of 3
::: Downloaded on - 10-06-2019 00:28:50 :::