Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Delhi High Court - Orders

Neeraj Kumar vs State on 3 February, 2021

Author: Mukta Gupta

Bench: Mukta Gupta

$~4 and 5
*     IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+      BAIL APPLN. 2232/2020
       NEERAJ KUMAR                                        ..... Petitioner
                Represented by:           Mr. Vikas Yadav, Advocate
                             versus
       STATE                                                ..... Respondent
                      Represented by:     Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for State


+      BAIL APPLN. 2639/2020
       DURVESH KUMAR                                        ..... Petitioner
               Represented by:            Mr. Imran Ali, Advocate
                             versus
       STATE OF NCT DELHI                                   ..... Respondent
                Represented by:           Mr. Tarang Srivastava, APP for State

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA
                             ORDER

% 03.02.2021 The hearing has been conducted through Video Conferencing.

1. By these petitions, the petitioners seek anticipatory bail in case FIR No. 160/2020 registered at PS - Sunlight Colony for the offences punishable under Sections 420/467/34 IPC.

2. The above noted FIR was registered on the complaint of one Mr.Sanjeev Kumar Gautam, who alleged that on 10th June, 2020, one BAIL APPLNs. 2232/2020 & 2639/2020 Signature Page 1 ofNot 4 Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:03.02.2021 20:54:51 person, namely, Ashish contacted him through mobile No. 8595481857 on behalf of ICICI Bank for giving loan. Thereafter, the so called Ashish sent a person named Abhishek having a mobile No. 8595450381. The said Abhishek came to the residence of the complainant and asked for the KYC documents but as the same were in the factory, Abhishek came to collect the said documents from his office at Okhla and alongwith the KYC documents, the complainant gave six cheques of his two bank accounts i.e. SBI and Canara Bank being current accounts of his firm at about 5.00-6.00 PM. On 11th June, 2020, SIM Card of the complainant in the mobile No. 9873579921 was deactivated at about 12 noon. At about 3.00 PM, the complainant noticed that he was not receiving any calls and SMS. He checked and found that his SIM card had been deactivated on the complaint of the SIM being lost. The complainant became suspicious and called his banks, where he found that the cheques given by him were used for withdrawing the money amounting to ₹7 lakhs, out of which ₹3,40,000/- were withdrawn from Canara Bank and ₹3,60,000/- from SBI.

3. During the course of investigation, CCTV footages were collected and the CDRs of the mobile phones were also obtained. As per CCTV footage, persons who had withdrawn ₹3,40,000/- from Canara Bank and ₹3,60,000/- from SBI could be seen. From the CCTV footage, car bearing No.HR-72B- 1367 was also located. The car was found to be registered in the name of one Devender Singh Raghav. CDR of the mobile phone of Devender Singh Raghav was obtained and after surveillance, Devender Singh Raghav was apprehended on 29th June, 2020. On his interrogation, Devender Singh Raghav disclosed that he was the person, who impersonated first as Ashish and then as Abhishek. TIP of Devender Singh Raghav was sought to be BAIL APPLNs. 2232/2020 & 2639/2020 Signature Page 2 ofNot 4 Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:03.02.2021 20:54:51 conducted, however, he refused to get his TIP conducted. During the course of investigation, he disclosed that Neeraj Sharma and Kamal Sharma were also associated with him.

4. The present petitions are filed by Neeraj Kumar and Durvesh Kumar. In the CCTV footage, it is evident that petitioner - Neeraj Kumar has taken Durvesh Kumar to withdraw the money from SBI. Neeraj Kumar and Durvesh Kumar withdrew the money on a fake identity card of one Sachin Kumar Tomar. Further, Neeraj Kumar also accompanied Kamal Sharma and Devender to the Canara Bank, where money was withdrawn by Kamal Sharma.

5. Plea of Durvesh Kumar is that he had lent some money to Neeraj Kumar and Neeraj Kumar had stated that he would give him the money and thus, brought him from Modi Nagar to Delhi and he had only accompanied Neeraj Kumar.

6. Learned APP for the State has referred to the CDRs, which show that withdrawal of the money took place on 11th June, 2020 and on 10th June, 2020, three SMS have been sent by Durvesh to Neeraj followed by one SMS from Neeraj and there are three calls interse Neeraj and Durvesh.

7. Learned counsel for Durvesh Kumar submits that despite the fact that Durvesh Kumar had no role in the offence, he has deposited a sum of ₹3,60,000/- before this Court and that charge-sheet has since been filed.

8. Merely, because Durvesh Kumar has deposited ₹3,60,000/- before this Court, which is the part cheated amount, the same cannot be a ground to grant anticipatory bail in case where further investigation is required to be conducted as to the manner in which the accused procured fake identity card of Sachin Kumar Tomar. Also even if the charge-sheet is filed, further BAIL APPLNs. 2232/2020 & 2639/2020 Signature Page 3 ofNot 4 Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:03.02.2021 20:54:51 investigation is required to be carried out from the petitioners as to how fake identity card was obtained.

9. Considering the fact that Neeraj Kumar accompanied the associates, who withdrew money from both the banks and Durvesh was the person, who withdrew the money from SBI, on a fake identify card, this Court finds no ground to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners in view of the manner in which the offence has been committed.

10. The petitions are accordingly dismissed.

11. Order be uploaded on the website of this Court.

MUKTA GUPTA, J.

FEBRUARY 03, 2021 PB BAIL APPLNs. 2232/2020 & 2639/2020 Signature Page 4 ofNot 4 Verified Digitally Signed By:JUSTICE MUKTA GUPTA Signing Date:03.02.2021 20:54:51