IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI
Sudhir Kumar Jain, J.
Deep Kanwar Singh Walia - Appellant
Versus
State NCT of Delhi - Respondent
Bail Appln. 3052 of 2022
Decided On : 23-12-2022
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. filing of bail application under code. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. petitioner's arguments for bail. (Para 3) |
| 3. status report findings. (Para 4) |
| 4. defense's detailed arguments. (Para 5) |
| 5. opposition response against bail. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 6. court’s observations on notice service. (Para 8) |
| 7. clarification of non-involvement and lack of allegations. (Para 9) |
| 8. judgment denying bail. (Para 10) |
| 9. final statement on order's implications. (Para 11) |
JUDGMENT
1. The present bail application is filed under section 439 of the Code Of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as "the Code") on behalf of the Deep Kanwar Singh Walia (hereinafter referred to as "the petitioner") for grant of bail in FIR bearing no. 268/2018 dated 27.12.2018 registered at PS Economic Offence Wing under sections 406/420/120B IPC.
2. The present FIR bearing no.0268/2018 was got registered on the basis of complaint made by J.P. Kakkar s/o C.L. Kakkar (hereinafter referred to as "the complainant") wherein it is alleged about cheating, fraud, and misappropriation of money which is stated to have been taken from the complainant for developing IT & IT Enabled Services Office Space(s)/Retail Unit in Project namely "Mist Avenue/Festival City" Business Towers, Sec 143-B, Noida, Uttar Pradesh at Plot No. 1, Sector 143-B, Noida by M/s Mist Avenue Private Limited (hereinafter referred to as "the Company") having its registered Office at premises bearing no.28, Raja Garden, New Delhi-110015 and against its Directors, namely, Mr. Dharam Narayan Gautam, Mr. Vinod Kumar, Mr. Kanwarjit Singh and Mr. Satinder Singh Bhasin. It is alleged in FIR that the complainant is a retired Additional General Manager from Bharat Heavy Electricals Limited and invested Rs.23,61,079/- (Rupees Twenty Three Lacs Sixty One Thousand and Seventy Nine Only) in the project "Mist Avenue" in the year 2013 being developed by the Company which is one of the Company under the umbrella of Bhasin Group.
2.1. The Company advertised about the project "Mist Avenue" in the year 2013 that 33 floors/storey would be constructed in 99 days and collected/demanded money without constructing the office spaces with the mala fide intention to dupe, cheat the buyers. The Company subsequently changed the plan and shifted the location of tower/structure which could not be permitted without the consent of all the allottees according to the U.P. Apartment Act, 2010. The Directors have changed the name of Company on RERA, U.P site without duly acting in accordance with the provisions of law and also increased the delivery time from 2018 to 2022 which was against the agreed terms with the complainant. It was not clear whether Mist Avenue/Festival City Project is being developed by M/s Mist Avenue Private Limited or M/s Mist Direct Sales Private Limited. The building structure was developed at very slow pace by the developer since 2012-13. The Company also changed its email domain names, bank accounts, project name (Mist Avenue to Festival City) and created another Company to mislead the allottees (Mist Avenue Private Limited to Mist Direct Sales Private Limited). The Ministry of Corporate Affairs (MCA) website reflects that these two companies are different. It reflected fraudulent intention of the developers with the sole intention to grab the hard earned money of the complainant.
2.2. The M/s Mist Avenue Private Limited had invited applications for Commercial IT Office Space/Retail unit in December 2012-13 with assurances to give the possession after 3 years after taking 100% payment from the complainant. The project is kept in abeyance without being constructed. M/s Anand Infoedge Private Limited has submitted the revised map on 12.01.2015 without getting permission from vagbirers and Sanctioned Authority (NOIDA) to increase the FAR and revised map/plan as evident from the letter dated 21.07.2017 of Noida Authority. The Company and its directors have duped, used criminal force, cheated, and misappropriated the
Bail applications must weigh the severity of fraud allegations and compliance with procedural requirements under criminal law before granting bail.
Bail should not be denied solely based on the seriousness of the charges; considerations must include the necessity of ensuring the accused's presence at trial and not obstructing justice.
Economic offences involving systematic financial irregularities and large-scale misappropriation require judicial circumspection; custodial interrogation is necessary when investigating complex trail....
Forgery of valuable security, will - Bail rejected - Petitioner was Managing Director of company and oral as well as documentary evidence available on record prima facie indicates that he along with ....
The court balanced the right to personal liberty with the need for the accused's presence at trial, emphasizing that continued custody should be based on the risk of interference in the administratio....
The court emphasized the balance between individual liberty and the interest of society in deciding bail applications, considering the nature and seriousness of economic offences and their impact on ....
Economic offenses necessitate a strict approach in bail considerations due to their serious implications on public interest and financial health, as highlighted in previous judgments cited by the cou....
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.