Punjab-Haryana High Court
Gagandeep Goyal vs State Of Punjab on 24 January, 2023
Author: Gurvinder Singh Gill
Bench: Gurvinder Singh Gill
In The High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana
At Chandigarh
(I) CRM-M-53126-2022 (O&M)
Date of Decision:- 24.1.2023
Gagandeep Goyal ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ... Respondent
(II) CRM-M-58835-2022 (O&M)
Pradeep Kumar ... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab ... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GURVINDER SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Preetinder Singh Ahluwalia, Advocate,
for the petitioner in CRM-M-53126-2022.
Mr. Rajesh Sethi, Advocate and
Mr. Tushar Gera, Advocate,
for the petitioner in CRM-M-58835-2022.
Mr. Luvinder Sofat, DAG, Punjab and
Mr. Siddharth Attri, AAG, Punjab,
assisted by DSP Inderpal Singh.
*****
GURVINDER SINGH GILL, J.
1. This order shall dispose of the above mentioned two petitions wherein petitioners Gagandeep Goyal and Pradeep Kumar, seek grant PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -2- of anticipatory bail in a case registered vide FIR No.09, dated 28.7.2022, Police Station Economic Offences Wing Vigilance Bureau, Ludhiana, under Sections 7, 7-A, 8, 12, 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (as amended in the year 2018), Sections 409, 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC (Sections 65, 66, 66-C, 66-D of the Information and Technology Act, 2000 added later on).
2. Since, the present case i.e. FIR No.9, dated 28.7.2022, came to be registered during the course of investigation of another FIR i.e. FIR No.8, dated 14.7.2022, Police Station Vigilance Bureau, Economic Offences Wing Punjab, Ludhiana, under Sections 7, 7-A of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 as amended by the Amendment Act, 2018, Section 120-B IPC, it is apposite to briefly refer to the facts of the said FIR i.e. FIR No.8. The aforesaid FIR No.8, was registered with the specific allegation that Harmeet Singh posted as Junior Assistant in Ludhiana Improvement Trust, was demanding bribe for himself as well as on behalf of Parveen Kumar, Sales Clerk and Kuljeet Kaur, Executive Officer, Ludhiana Improvement Trust, for extending undue benefit to private persons in the matter of allotment of plots etc. A trap was laid and Harmeet Singh was caught red-handed while accepting an amount of Rs.10,000/- as illegal gratification which also led to arrest of Parveen Kumar, Sales Clerk and Kuljeet Kaur, Executive Officer.
3. During the course of investigation of aforesaid FIR No.8, Kuljeet Kaur, Executive Officer, disclosed that she as well as other officials of Ludhiana Improvement Trust, had committed various PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -3- embezzlements, manipulations, frauds etc. for the purpose of allotment of plots to various individuals, in return for illegal gratification. She also disclosed the modus operandi adopted by the officials of Ludhiana Improvement Trust. Consequently, the instant FIR No. 9, dated 28.7.2022, came to be lodged against 15 accused namely Raman Bala Subramanium, Ex-Chairman, Kuljit Kaur, Executive Officer, Parveen Kumar, Sale Clerk, Ankit Narang, SDO, Gagandeep Goel, Clerk, Sandeep Sharma, PA to Chairman, Manjit Singh Sethi (purchaser of plot after manipulation), Sanjeev Jain @ Sanjay Jain (private property dealer), Manjit Singh (private purchaser of one plot after manipulation), Pardeep Kumar (private IT expert), Buta Ram, XEN, Engineering Branch, Jagdev Singh, XEN, Engineering Branch, Inderjeet Singh, JE Engineering Branch, Mandeep Singh, J.E. (O&M Cell), Municipal Corporation, Ludhiana, Kamaldeep Singh (owner of plot No.1544-D).
4. It is the case of prosecution that Pradeep Kumar was a computer expert and was running a Cyber Cafe at Ludhiana, and that he in connivance with the officials of the Improvement Trust, particularly Ankit Narang, SDO, used his technical expertise in computers in manipulating the bids in e-acution of plots to get the plots allotted to their favourites. The case of the prosecution against Gagandeep Goyal, Clerk is that he by manipulating the official record had got restored, the allotment of plots which had previously been cancelled and had transferred ownership of such restored plots in favour of his favourites, including Lovely Rani, with whom he had been residing as her husband, since long.
PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -4-
5. Learned counsel for petitioner-Pradeep Kumar has submitted that he has falsely been implicated in the present case and that although, the allegations are to the effect that he, with his technical expertise, had hacked e-auction portal, but the said e-auction portal is a highly reliable software, which is used by several agencies, across the entire nation, and there has been no such instance of hacking, till date.
6. Learned counsel representing Gagandeep Goyal has submitted that there is no evidence worth credence to establish the allegations against the petitioner of having committed any forgery or fraud for the purpose of transfer of ownership of any plot and that Lovely Rani, to whom one such plot is stated to have been transferred is not the wife of the petitioner, as is being alleged by the prosecution.
7. Opposing the petitions, the learned State counsel has submitted that the evidence which has been collected during the course of investigation clearly shows the involvement of the petitioners. It has been submitted that petitioner-Pardeep Kumar, who was proficient in operating computers and was running a Cyber Cafe, had connived with officials of the Ludhiana Improvement Trust, and that since Ludhiana Improvement Trust, had been conducting online auctions of plots through e-auction portal, therefore, whenever any prospective bidder used to contact Ankit Narang, SDO, Ludhiana Improvement Trust, he used to refer such prospective bidder to the petitioner who was running a Cyber Cafe for the purpose of preparing his digital ID to enable him to participate in the online auction proceedings and that the petitioner while preparing such digital ID used to specifically PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -5- instruct such prospective bidder not to change the password and that when the e-auctions were conducted, the present present petitioner in connivance with the officials of Ludhiana Improvement Trust, used to get plots allotted in favour of their favourites by making a nominal increase in their bids.
8. Learned State counsel has further submitted that in some cases, the petitioner with his expertise in computers and having passwords used to inflate the bids multiple times, made by innocent bidders inasmuch as bids in terms of lakhs used to be inflated to bids worth crores and consequently, such innocent bidders, upon being declared the highest bidder had to get the earnest amount forfeited. The learned State counsel submitted that as a matter of fact, several complaints had been made in this regard including complaints by Parkash Chopra, Advocate, Sarbjinder Singh Bhullar, Sanjay Kumar, Seema Rani etc. to ex-Chairman Shri Raman Bala Subramanium, who himself was also involved in the scam but no action was taken on the basis of said complaints. It has also been informed that on one occasion the petitioner in connivance with the officials managed to get a property measuring 3.79 acres in Model Town Extension, sold through e- auction at a throw away price.
9. Learned State counsel while opposing the petition on behalf of Gagandeep Goyal has referred to several instances where the allotment of plots which had originally been cancelled, on account of non-payment, were got restored and allotted by presenting impostors in place of the original allottees. The necessary formalities were got PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -6- completed through impostors and thereafter re-sold the plots to their favourites. The learned State counsel has drawn the attention of this Court to the Aadhaar Card of Veedhi Goel wherein she is referred to as daughter of Gagandeep Goyal and also to the Aadhaar card of Lovely Rani wherein she is referred to as wife of Gagandeep Goyal and the address of both said persons is the same i.e. H.No.528/64, Block J, BRS Nagar, Rajguru Nagar, Ludhiana. The learned State counsel has also referred to the information collected from the service provider Airtel with respect to mobile number of Lovely Rani i.e. phone number 76578-88689 wherein also Lovely Rani has disclosed herself to be wife of Gagandeep Goyal.
10. This Court has considered the rival submissions.
11. As far as petitioner-Pradeep Kumar is concerned, the evidence collected by the police during investigation clearly shows that the petitioner with his expertise in computers and in connivance with the officials of Ludhiana Improvement Trust, particularly SDO Ankit Narang, used to prepare IDs for prospective bidders who were referred to him by Ankit Narang and cleverly told them not to change their passwords and later on with the help of the said passwords used to facilitate his favourites to be successful in the bids by making a marginal increase in their bids and sometimes in order to defeat the auction proceedings, he along with officials used to highly inflate the bids so that such bidder does not pay the amount. The custodial interrogation of the petitioner-Pradeep Kumar would certainly be required to unearth the finer details of the modus operandi, PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -7- particularly when it is a case where the computer software and computer expertise has been used for the commission of offence. Petitioner-Pardeep Kumar, as such does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.
12. As regards petitioner-Gagandeep Goyal, the documentary evidence against him clearly shows that he had adopted a novel modus operandi for allotment of some plots to his favourites. It has been shown that there were some cases where the plots allotted to some allottees had been cancelled on account of non-payment or for other reasons. However, later when One Time Measure Policy came into existence so as to enable such allottees to get their plots restored/re- allotted, the petitioner-Gagandeep Goyal, who was posted as Sales Clerk in Ludhiana Improvement Trust, got such plots restored by putting-forth some impostors, who represented themselves to be such original allottees whose plots had been previously cancelled and after getting the requisite formalities completed, the cancelled plots were allotted in the names of such original allottees and later such impostor allottees transferred such restored plots in name of their favourites. Some of the instances, as discovered during the course of investigation are mentioned as under:
i. Plot No.10-G/40, 475 Acre Scheme, Ludhiana The said plot was originally allotted to one Narayan Singh under the 1984 Riot Affected person/Sikh migrant quota but was later cancelled. After getting the said plot restored, the same was got transferred in the name of Lovely Rani, who is none else, but the wife of petitioner-Gagandeep Goyal, as is PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -8- evident from the Aadhaar Cards annexed as Annexures R-1 and R-2 and also from the extract of the record maintained by service provider Airtel in respect of phone number 76578-88689 wherein the subscriber Lovely Rani had disclosed her spouse name as Gagandeep Goyal.
ii. Plot No. 114-D in 475 acre scheme, Ludhiana The said plot was initially allotted to one Jagroop Singh on 21.5.2021, and thereafter on the fictitious request of Jagroop Singh, it was transferred to one Nisha. However, during investigation, the statement of son of Jagroop Singh was recorded, who stated that his father had already expired on 26.3.2020, which again shows that there is hanky-panky in said allotment.
iii. Plot No.181 measuring 662 Sq. Yds, Transport Nagar Scheme, Ludhiana The said plot was initially allotted in the name of M/s Carvaan Goods Carrier, but was cancelled vide order dated 14.1.1988. Although M/s Carvaan Goods Carrier, had filed a writ petition in the High Court, but was dismissed. Subsequently, false notings were prepared and a resolution number No.174 dated 19.10.2021 was passed and the plot was shown to be restored in the name of one Waryam Singh who had no concern with the said plot, which had been cancelled 40 years back.
13. The aforesaid instances apart from other instances clearly show the active involvement of the petitioner. Plot number 10-G/40 has been allotted in favour of none else but petitioner's wife. As such, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be necessary to unravel the other instances of frauds committed by the petitioner. PANKAJ KAKKAR 2023.01.24 17:41 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document CRM-M Nos.53126 & 58835 of 2022 (O&M) -9-
14. Both the petitions, as such, merit dismissal and are hereby dismissed.
15. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of each connected case.
24.1.2023 ( GURVINDER SINGH GILL)
mohan JUDGE
Whether speaking /reasoned Yes / No
Whether Reportable Yes / No
PANKAJ KAKKAR
2023.01.24 17:41
I attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this document