The decision highlighted the importance of evaluating each bail application based on its unique facts and circumstances, and the significance of evidence such as call details, chat records, and possession of incriminating photos in determining active involvement in a fraudulent transaction.

JUDGMENT :

BRIJESH SETHI, J.

1. Vide this order, I shall dispose of a bail application filed under Section 439 Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioner Ankur Goel for grant of bail in FIR no. 150/2019, under Section 420/120B/34 IPC, PS Special Cell (SB).

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for anticipatory bail on the ground that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. Petitioner is currently holding a Permanent Resident Permit of Germany. Petitioner is in custody since 03.02.2020. He has moved two bail applications dated 11.02.2020 and 13.02.2020 respectively before the Ld. CMM, Patiala House Courts but the same were dismissed. It is submitted that petitioner has no connection with the entire alleged transaction as neither the payment for the alleged transaction were made from the card of the petitioner nor the delivery of the goods were made to the petitioner. It is further submitted that offence of cheating was committed by one Naved Malik and petitioner is not even named in the FIR as an accused. It is further submitted that petitioner has no criminal antecedents and there are no chances of his absconding. It is, therefore, prayed that petitioner be released on bail.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner, in support of its submissions, has relied upon the following case law:-

(1) Sanjay Chandra v. CBI, Crl. A.No. 2178 of 2011;

(2) Arnesh Kumar v. State of Bihar & Anr., (2014) 8 SCC 273.

4. I have gone through the above case law. It is a settled law that each bail application is to be decided on the basis of its own peculiar facts and circumstances. No straitjacket formula can be laid own for dispose of the bail application. So far as the cases cited by Ld. Counsel are concerned, these are distinguishable on the basis of the facts and circumstances stated therein.

5. Ld. APP for the State has opposed the bail application on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature. Petitioner had made call from mobile no. +491707744302 to the complainant and purchased goods. The CDRs of mobile phone no. +491707744302 duly prove the fact that orders were placed from this mobile phone only. He has, therefore prayed for dismissal of the bail application.

6. I have considered the rival submissions. The present case u/S. 419/420/120B/34 IPC was registered on a complaint filed by Ms Rose Conlan, on behalf of M/s Christian Louboutin India Pvt Ltd, a company dealing in super luxury leather items and having store at DLF Emporio mall, Vasant Kunj, Delhi. It is alleged that one Naved Mallik, a US resident made a call on 11.03.2019 from a foreign no. +491707744302 at the landline phone of the outlet and showed his interest in purchasing shoes from the outlet. The caller provided his mail ID which was n.malli@kaza410.com. On 12.03.2019, the caller selected few items (shoes/purse) having total cost of Rs 25,80,500/-. On 19.03.2019, the caller used a different number i.e. 87368377395 and placed order and also forwarded authorisation letter in respect of three cards which were to be swiped, through another mail ID i.e. mnaved361@gmail.com. The payment was made from these cards on 19/03/2019 and delivery of these items (27 pairs of shoes and 3 bags) was taken by two persons from the outlet, sent by the caller on 20.03.2019. On 22.03.2019, the caller again placed order after selecting some other items and made payment of Rs 11,00,000/-in the same way and taken the delivery of items (8 bags/purse) on 23/03/2019 through the same two persons. Thereafter, the caller raised a dispute on the transaction of the credit cards and got charge back of the full amount. Thus, it caused a wrongful loss to the company for an amount of Rs. 36,80,500/-. The ILD search report of the alleged phone number +491707744302 was obtained from Indian telecom service providers and it was found that some Indian phone numbers were in contact with this number. Analysis of those numbers led to an Indian mobile number i.e. 7777877774. According to