Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Michal Siengh, vs The State Of Andhra Pradesh on 7 January, 2021
THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI
CRIMINAL PETITION NO. 6036 OF 2020
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short "Cr.P.C.") seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioners/A-35, A-36 and A-13 respectively in the event of their arrest in connection with Crime No.279 of 2020 of Thulluru Police Station, Guntur District registered for the offences punishable under Sections 170, 410, 420, 465, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.
2. The case of prosecution is that a complaint was lodged by the de facto complainant, Assistant Secretary to Government, Revenue Department on 20.09.2020 stating that he received communication from the Branch Manager that the cheque bearing No.694499 dated 09.09.2020 for an amount of Rs.52,65,00,000/-, cheque bearing No.792896 dated 07.09.2020 Rs.39,85,95,540 and cheque bearing No.792893 dated 14.09.2020 for Rs.24,65,00,000 is deposited in the bank. Then the complainant informed that the cheques were not issued by the Revenue Department and in fact those cheques were issued in favour of some others and when it is informed to the Principal Secretary (Lands), Revenue Department, as per the oral orders of the Principal Secretary (Lands), Revenue Department, the present complaint is lodged.
3. Heard Sri K.Srinivas, learned counsel for the petitioners and the learned Addl. Public Prosecutor for the respondent-State. 2
4. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that in the entire complaint the names of the petitioners were not mentioned, but in the remand report it is only stated that basing on the confession of A-11, the petitioners were arrayed as accused Nos.35, 36 and 13. Further A-18 during the police custody from 19.11.2020 to 21.11.2020 disclosed the role of the present petitioners. He submits that except receiving the whatsapp messages, petitioners have no role in the offence. He further submits that A-11 on whose confession these petitioners names are added is also granted bail as such, the petitioners are also entitled for bail.
5. Learned Public Prosecutor on the other hand, strenuously opposed the bail petition and submits that this is a case of attempt to cause huge monetary loss to the Government, wherein initially basing on the confession of A-5, A-13 i.e petitioner No.3 is arrayed as accused and he is the person who is responsible for creating these fake cheques and on the confession of A-18 the petitioners 1 and 2 are arrayed as A-35 and A-36. Learned Public Prosecutor has drawn the attention of this Court to the confessional statements of accused Nos.5 and 18 wherein specific overt acts are levelled against the present petitioners. He further submits that the investigation is in progress and to bring out the true facts, examining the present petitioners is very much essential. He submits that the accused who are involved in these kind of crimes are not entitled for pre-arrest bail. 3
6. In view of the grave allegations leveled against the petitioners, this Court is not inclined to grant bail to the petitioners.
7. Accordingly, this Criminal Petition is dismissed.
Consequently, miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed.
___________________________ LALITHA KANNEGANTI, J Date :07.01.2021 KA 4 THE HON'BLE SMT. JUSTICE LALITHA KANNEGANTI Dismissed CRIMINAL PETITION No.6036 of 2020 07.01.2021 KA