Andhra Pradesh High Court - Amravati
Ch.Hari Babu vs State Of Andhra Pradesh on 2 December, 2019
Author: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
Bench: Cheekati Manavendranath Roy
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY
CRIMINAL PETITION No.7157 OF 2019
ORDER:-
This petition is filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 to enlarge the petitioner on bail in the event of his arrest.
2. The petitioner is A-2 in Crime No.227 of 2016 of Kadapa I Town Police Station, Kadapa District.
3. The alleged offences against the petitioner are under Sections 120-B, 406, 419 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short "I.P.C.").
4. It is the case of the prosecution that the petitioner herein along with other accused, who are A-1, A-3 and A-4, with a malafide intention to cheat the bank officials, has created a fake document showing that they are the partners of "Harsha Automotives Private Limited" and that the said firm is at Door No.17/470-1 at Venkateswarapuram of Nellore and on the basis of the said fake document, they have obtained a loan of Rs.7,50,000/- to purchase a car and thereby availed the said loan. They also did not produce the said car before the bank for verification also and thereby cheated the bank i.e. Lakshmi Vilas Bank, Nellore and committed the aforesaid offences.
5. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the Public Prosecutor.
6. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that A-1 and A-4 were arrested and thereafter they are released on bail 2 and entire investigation in this case is completed and thereby he prayed for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
7. Learned Assistant Public Prosecutor representing the Public Prosecutor vehemently opposed the criminal petition. He would submit that investigation in this case is not completed and it is still in progress. He would further submit that A-1 and A-4 are arrested, however he has no instructions that they were released on bail as stated by the learned counsel for the petitioner. He would submit that as this is a petition for anticipatory bail and in view of the seriousness of the allegations and as it is a case of cheating the bank by creating fake documents, that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners and thereby prayed for dismissal of the petition.
8. Perused the record.
9. The representation made by the petitioner that entire investigation is completed is absolutely false. The record shows that the investigation is still pending and it is in progress. Further, the record prima facie shows that it is a case where, the petitioner along with other accused have created a fake document showing as if they are the partners of "Harsha Automotives Private Limited" and thereby availed loan of Rs.7,50,000/- from the bank on the basis of the said fake document. Therefore, the accusation made against the petitioner herein regarding the commission of the aforesaid offences is prima facie well founded. As it is a case of cheating the bank to avail loan of Rs.7,50,000/- by fabricating and creating and producing of a fake document for the said purpose, 3 in view of the seriousness of the allegations and the gravity of the offence, this Court is of the considered view that it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail.
10. In the result, the Criminal Petition is dismissed.
____________________________________________ JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY Date : 02-12-2019 ARR 4 THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE CHEEKATI MANAVENDRANATH ROY CRIMINAL PETITION No.7157 OF 2019 Date : 02-12-2019 ARR