IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Anu Malhotra, J.
Padam Kumar Dagar - Appellant
Versus
State (Govt.Of Nct, Delhi) - Respondent
Bail Appln. 1198/2022
Decided On : 28-07-2022
Anticipatory Bail - Misappropriation of Funds under Land Pooling Policy - Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 406/409/420/120B - Land Pooling Policy 2013, Land Pooling Regulations 2018 - The court allowed the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in the event of arrest on filing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount. The applicant was directed to join the investigation, keep his mobile phone on at all times, drop a PIN on the google map to ensure his location is available to the Investigating Officer, and commit no offence during the period of anticipatory bail.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant sought anticipatory bail in relation to FIR No. 292/2019, PS EOW Delhi, under Sections 406/409/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, related to misappropriation of funds under the Land Pooling Policy. The State alleged that the accused, including the applicant, were involved in a deep-rooted conspiracy to siphon off the money of investors who desired to buy a home for their family.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that all other co-accused in the case were either on regular bail or anticipatory bail, and there were no previous adverse antecedents against the present applicant. The court observed that the alleged documentary evidence had already been collected by the Investigating Agency, and there was apparently no custodial interrogation required in the matter.
Issues: The issues involved the alleged misappropriation of funds under the Land Pooling Policy, the involvement of the applicant in forming a firm to siphon off money from the society, and the receipt of money through bank accounts and companies.
Ratio Decidendi: The court granted anticipatory bail to the applicant based on the lack of adverse antecedents, the collection of alleged documentary evidence by the Investigating Agency, and the fact that other co-accused were on bail. The court also considered the applicant's undertaking to join the investigation, keep his mobile phone on at all times, drop a PIN on the google map to ensure his location is available to the Investigating Officer, and commit no offence during the period of anticipatory bail.
Final Decision: The court allowed the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant in the event of arrest on filing a bail bond in the sum of Rs. 1,00,000/- with one surety of the like amount. The applicant was directed to join the investigation, keep his mobile phone on at all times, drop a PIN on the google map to ensure his location is available to the Investigating Officer, and commit no offence during the period of anticipatory bail.
JUDGMENT
Anu Malhotra, J. - The applicant, vide the present application seeks the grant of anticipatory bail in relation to FIR No. 292/2019, PS EOW Delhi, under Sections 406/409/420/120B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 submitting to the effect that he has been falsely implicated in the instant case.
2. Vide order dated 19.04.2022, notice of the application was issued to the State. As it was informed on behalf of the State on 06.05.2022 that the applicant had joined the investigation and the investigation was to be concluded in the near future with it having been undertaken on behalf of the applicant that he was ready to join the investigation as and when directed, the applicant was thus vide order dated 06.05.2022 directed to join the investigation of the case on 10.05.2022 at the concerned Police Station at 4.00 PM with directions to the Investigating Officer to prepare a questionnaire in advance to the same with it having been directed that no coercive action be taken against the applicant, which interim directions are presently in existence.
3. The status report dated 26.04.2022 under signatures of the ACP EOW New Delhi was submitted by the State. Submissions have been made on behalf of the either side qua the application. The State has submitted to the effect that the FIR in the instant case was registered on the complaint of Mr. Rewant Kumar Mishra S/o Sh. B.D. Mishra who alleged that in view of an advertisement received on SMS and Newspapers, he learned about residential flats being built by Revanta Multi State CGHS Ltd (Smart Residency) by way of Land Pooling in L Zone Dwarka Delhi, and in June 2015, he along with his family members met the builder at the office. It has been submitted further that as per the allegations levelled by the complainant, it was claimed that the builder and agents allured the complainant and his family members that the project was very viable and would be completed by 2019-2020, and believing their false promises, he agreed to buy a Flat in the proposed L Zone in Delhi through Membership No. SR70264 in the name of Mrs. Archana Mishra measuring 1675 Sqft for a total agreed amount of Rs. 51.20 Lacs of which the land cost was to be paid within 45 days and he thus made the payment of Rs. 20.21 Lacs, but he saw no progress in the matter as no construction was initiated though the flat was promised to be handed over by 2019 and later he learned that the DDA had not approved any of the builder till date and that the property dealers/builders were cheating innocent persons in the name of CGHS.
4. It has been further submitted through the status report that during investigation, 298 members filed their complaints of which 42 joined the investigation and during examination, it was learned that the office bearers of the society, including Satender Maan, Pradeep Sehrawat, Subhash Chand and others have misappropriated the money collected from the members of the society on the pretext of purchase of land and commission to member facilitation agencies, without their knowledge and consent.
5. It has been further stated through the status report that the concept of Land Pooling Policy (LPP) was conceived by the Government in the year 2013 which was to the effect that under this Land Pooling Policy (LPP), the DDA would pool land parcels owned by individuals, a group of owners or a builder, and would then develop the land and return it to the owners, and this system would replace the process of land acquisition, and this new policy would be applicable to urban extensions of Delhi for which zonal plans have been approved, and that the concept is about developing urban land parcels available in the city, especially in the outskirts, in an efficient, sustainable and equitable manner, and that this was likely to help develop and expand the city in a planned manner by increasing the supply of the fresh land.
6. Inter alia, it was submitted by the State that the Regulations for Operation of Land Policy, 2018 have been notif
Bhadresh Bipinbhai Sheth vs. State of Gujarat (2016) 1 SCC 152
Inder Mohan Goswami vs. State of Uttaranchal
Joginder Kumar case (1994) 4 SCC 260
Narendra Singh and Another vs. State of M.P. (2004) 10 SCC 699
Ravindra Saxena vs. State of Rajasthan
The main legal point established in the judgment is the grant of anticipatory bail to the applicant based on the lack of adverse antecedents, the collection of alleged documentary evidence by the Inv....
The main legal point established in the judgment is that in cases of financial fraud and deep-rooted conspiracy, granting anticipatory bail may impede the investigation and there is a possibility of ....
Point of law: While laying down cast-iron rules in a matter like granting anticipatory bail, it is apt to be overlooked that even judges can have but an imperfect awareness of the needs of new situat....
Point of law: While laying down cast-iron rules in a matter like granting anticipatory bail, it is apt to be overlooked that even judges can have but an imperfect awareness of the needs of new situat....
Anticipatory bail under Section 438 of the CrPC emphasizes the presumption of innocence and the principle of 'bail not jail,' allowing for a liberal interpretation favoring the applicants unless comp....
Since the genesis of the statutory right to anticipatory bail is traced under Article 21 of the Constitution, it is essential to understand the true import of the same.
The stringent conditions set by Section 45 of the P.M.L. Act for granting bail in money laundering cases were central to the court's decision.
The judgment establishes that the grant of anticipatory bail in economic offences is an extraordinary remedy and should be considered only in exceptional cases, balancing the rights of the accused wi....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.