Punjab-Haryana High Court
Inderjit Anand vs State Of Punjab on 10 September, 2012
Author: Mehinder Singh Sullar
Bench: Mehinder Singh Sullar
CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
(1) CRM No.M-21500 of 2012(O&M)
Inderjit Anand .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
(2) CRM No.M-20636 of 2012(O&M)
Sudhir Sayal .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
(3) CRM No.M-21305 of 2012(O&M)
Opesh Kumar Gupta .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
(4) CRM No.M-20672 of 2012(O&M)
Krishan Kumar Gupta .....Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .....Respondent
Date of Decision:10.09.2012
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR.
Present: Mr.Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate,
with Mr.Mandeep Kaushik, Advocate,
Mr.Akshay Bhan, Advocate,
Mr.Kanwaljit Singh, Senior Advocate,
with Mr.I.P.S.Mangat, Advocate, and
Mr.S.P.S.Sidhu, Advocate,
for the petitioner(s).
Mr.Raj Preet Singh Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab,
for the respondent-State.
Nemo for the complainant-PNB.
****
MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR, J.(oral) As, identical points for consideration to grant regular bail or CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 2 otherwise, to the petitioners are involved, therefore, I propose to decide the above indicated petitions, arising out of the same criminal case/FIR, vide this common order, in order to avoid the repetition of facts.
2. Tersely, the facts and material, which need a necessary mention for the limited purpose of deciding the core controversy, involved in the instant petitions and emanating from the record and status report submitted by the police by way of affidavit of Gurpreet Kaur Purewal, Assistant Commissioner of Police, Ludhiana, are that, accused-Inderjit Anand, was having a joint account along with his son Navil Anand and brother Harish Kumar Anand, in Punjab National Bank, Barewal Road, Ludhiana. On 22.02.2012, he presented a fake account payee cheque bearing No.FAK-947271 dated 14.02.2012, for a sum of Rs.1,07,12,500/- in his joint account, purported to have been issued by M/s Nirmal Darbar, out of its current account. Accordingly, the said amount was credited in his(Inderjit Anand) joint account. Thereafter, within a period of two days, accused Inderjit Anand withdrew the entire amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- from the said Bank account by different modes of withdrawal mentioned therein. M/s Nirmal Darbar informed its Bank that they have not issued any such cheque and the amount of Rs.1,07,12,500/- has been wrongly debited from their bank account. According to the prosecution that, on comparison of both the cheques, it revealed that the cheque submitted by the accused-Inderjit Anand was fake and he has illegally and fraudulently withdrew the amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- in this respect.
3. The case of the prosecution further proceeds, in status report, that during the course of investigation, it revealed that the impugned fake cheque was prepared by Dheeraj Walia, co-accused of the petitioners, and he handed over the fake cheque to accused-Sudhir Sayal, for its presentation in his bank account. He (accused Sudhir Sayal) further handed over the cheque in question to his other co- accused Krishan Kumar Gupta, for its presentation in his bank account. He CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 3 (accused Krishan Kumar Gupta) again handed over that fake cheque to other co- accused-Opesh Kumar Gupta, for its presentation in his bank account, for the reasons best known to them. Ultimately, he(accused-Opesh Kumar Gupta) further handed over that cheque to his co-accused Inderjit Anand, who presented the fake cheque in his account and fraudulently withdrew an amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- within a period of two days. There are specific allegations that subsequently all the accused have divided the fraudulently withdrawn impugned amount amongst themselves, in order to cheat the bank.
4. Levelling a variety of allegations and narrating the sequence of events, in all, the prosecution claimed that, all the accused have hatched a well- thought criminal conspiracy, committed forgery, prepared and possessed the forged cheque for the purpose of cheating and used it as genuine. Not only that, they illegally withdrew and apportioned amongst themselves a huge amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- fraudulently withdrawn from the pointed account of the Bank, on the basis of fake cheque in question. In the background of these allegations and in the wake of complaint of complainant-Senior Manager, Punjab National Bank, the instant criminal case was registered against the petitioners-accused along with their other co-accused, namely, Dheeraj Walia, by means of FIR No.12 dated 02.03.2012, on accusation of having committed the heinous offences punishable under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472, 473, 474 and 120-B IPC, by the police of Police Station PAU, Ludhiana, in the manner depicted hereinabove.
5. Having exercised and lost their right before the Court of Additional Sessions Judge, now the petitioners-accused have preferred the present separate petitions for the grant of regular bail to them, invoking the provisions of Section 439 Cr.P.C.
6. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties, having gone through the record with their valuable assistance and after bestowal of thoughts CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 4 over the entire matter, to my mind, there is no merit in the instant petitions in this context.
7. Ex facie, the arguments of the learned counsel that, the petitioners have been falsely implicated, there is no cogent evidence on record that they have divided the impugned amount and since, no direct allegations of forgery are attributed to them, so, the petitioners-accused are entitled to regular bail, are not only devoid of merit but misconceived as well.
8. As is evident from the record, status report and police file that, during the course of investigation, the police has collected the evidence that co- accused Dheeraj Walia, who is still absconding, has prepared the forged cheque in question, for a total sum of Rs.1,07,12,500/-, purported to have been issued from the account of M/s Nirmal Darbar, which on verification was found to be false. It has been specifically mentioned in the status report that accused-Dheeraj Walia handed over the fake cheque to accused-Sudhir Sayal, for its presentation. He further handed over the said cheque to accused Krishan Kumar Gupta, for its presentation in his bank account. He(Krishan Kumar Gupta) again handed over the cheque in question to accused-Opesh Kumar Gupta, for its presentation in his bank account, for the reasons best known to them. In this manner, all the petitioners-accused possessed the forged cheque, with the intention to use it as genuine. Ultimately, accused-Opesh Kumar Gupta handed over that cheque to accused-Inderjit Anand, who presented the fake cheque and fraudulently withdrew a huge amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/- within a period of two days, in the manner described therein in the FIR. There are direct allegations that after the withdrawal of the amount of Rs.1,06,50,000/-, all the petitioners-accused have apportioned the impugned amount fraudulently withdrawn, on the basis of indicated fake cheque. The mere fact that Opesh Kumar Gupta has produced two alleged bills/receipts dated 22.02.2012 and 23.02.2012 (Annexures P-1 to P-4) (in Criminal Misc.No.M- CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 5 21305 of 2012), (the genuineness and validity or otherwise of which, are yet to be proved), in an unsuccessful attempt, to explain the receipt of amount of his share, as price of the clothes, ipso facto is not a ground, much less cogent, to exonerate from the heinous offences, as urged on his behalf. These transactions appear to have been concocted by the accused to save their skin and to create a false defence in this relevant connection.
9. Meaning thereby, prima facie, there is sufficient evidence on record, to prove the complicity of the petitioners-accused for the indicated heinous offences. It cannot possibly be denied that the tendency and frequency of preparing such false documents/cheques and fraudulent withdrawal of amount from the bank and the race of earning easy money to become rich in a day, by such accused persons, have been tremendously increasing day by day, adversely affecting the economy of the country, which needs to be curbed with heavy hand. It is not a matter of dispute that Dheeraj Walia, co-accused of the petitioners, is still absconding and repeated raids are being conducted by the police to arrest him, to ascertain the involvement of the petitioners-accused in any other such scams. To me, if the petitioners-accused are allowed the concession of regular bail, then the possibility of tampering with the evidence by them, with the connivance of absconded accused-Dheeraj Walia, cannot possibly be ruled out, at this stage.
10. Therefore, taking into consideration the totality of seriousness of the allegations of hatching a well-thought and deep-rooted criminal conspiracy and other heinous pointed offences, as indicated here-in-above, to my mind, the petitioners are not entitled to the concession of regular bail, at this initial stage, in the obtaining circumstances of the cases.
11. In the light of aforesaid reasons and without commenting further anything on merits, lest it may prejudice the cases of either side during the course of trial, as there is no merit, therefore, the instant petitions for regular bail are CRM No.M-21500 of 2012 6 hereby dismissed as such.
Needless to mention that nothing observed hereinabove would reflect, in any manner, on the merits of the main case, as the same has been so recorded for a limited purpose of deciding the present petitions for regular bail.
September 10, 2012 (MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR) seema JUDGE