IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
CHANDER BHUSAN BAROWALIA, J.
MADAN GOPAL CHAUHAN S/O SHRI NAROTAM DASS – Petitioner
Versus
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH – Respondent
Criminal Misc. Petition (Main) No. 1293 of 2022
Decided On : 24-06-2022
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 438 – Indian Penal Code,1860- Sections 420, 409, 465, 468, 471, 472 and 120- B – Criminal Conspiracy - Fraud by obtaining Bank loan - Forged documents - Alleging that he is Regional Manager and duly authorized by competent authority to represent case and submitted that Jitender Verma, Daulat Ram, Sanjeev Kumar, Sapna and Ram Lal, committed fraud by obtaining Bank loan on basis of forged documents. They are brokers, who helped in manipulating documents - Accused persons forged signatures of Sub Registrar, by putting forged stamps on documents, so that it may appear genuine and thereafter submitted same to Bank concerned. By using camera trick, photographs of executants is also procured by forging document and also mentioned fake registration number on all mortgaged deeds. After sometime, all loan accounts became irregular, as a result of which, Bank Officials issued notices/reminders to pay loan amount - This Court finds that present is a fit case, where judicial discretion to admit petitioner on bail, in event of his arrest, in this case, is required to be exercised in his favour. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that petitioner, in event of his arrest, in case FIR, under Sections 420, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station, be forthwith released on bail on his furnishing personal bonds to tune of Rs.20,000/with one surety in like amount to satisfaction of Investigating Officer. (Para 8)
Finding of the court: Neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice, he is joining and co-operating in the investigation, ready and willing to abide by the terms and conditions of bail, in case granted, considering fact that nothing remains to be recovered from the petitioner, his custody is not at all required by the police for further investigation and also considering all other facets of the case and without discussing the same elaborately, this Court finds that present is a fit case, where judicial discretion to admit the petitioner on bail, in the event of his arrest, in this case, is required to be exercised in his favour. Under these circumstances, it is ordered that petitioner, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR, under Sections 420, 409, 465, 467, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of IPC, registered at Police Station, be forthwith released on bail on his furnishing personal with one surety in like amount to satisfaction of Investigating Officer.
Result: Petition disposed of.
ORDER :
1. The present bail application has been maintained by the petitioner, under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking his release in case FIR No. 8/2021, dated 17.7.2021, under Sections 420, 409, 465, 468, 471, 472 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station, CID Bharari, Shimla, H.P.
2. As per the averments made in the petition, the petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated in the present case. He is permanent resident of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. No fruitful purpose will be served by sending him behind the bars, so he be released on bail.
3. Police report stands filed. As per the prosecution story, Shri Makhan Singh (complainant) made a complaint before the police alleging therein that he is Regional Manager, Regional Office, Solan, Himachal Pradesh Gramin Bank, and duly authorized by the competent authority to represent the case and submitted that Jitender Verma, Daulat Ram, Sanjeev Kumar, Sapna and Ram Lal, committed fraud by obtaining Bank loan on the basis of forged documents. They are brokers, who helped in manipulating the documents. It is further alleged in the complaint that as per the Banking norms for obtaining the Bank loan, loanee has to submit his documents of land and ‘No Objection Certificate’ from the concerned Patwari to the effect that there is no loan against the property. After sanction, the loanee has to create the charge by way of mutation in favour of the financing Bank in case of KCC loan and in case of housing loan, loanee has to create the charge on land and building by way of execution of registered mortgage deed. The accused persons forged the signatures of the Sub Registrar, Theog, by putting the forged stamps on the documents, so that it may appear genuine and thereafter submitted the same to the Bank concerned. By using the camera trick, the photographs of the executants is also procured by forging the document and also mentioned the fake registration number on all the mortgaged deeds. After sometime, all the loan accounts became irregular, as a result of which, Bank Officials issued notices/reminders to pay the loan amount, but all the loanee did not care to pay the loan amount with intention to cheat the Bank. Lastly, it is prayed that the instant bail application may be dismissed, as the petitioner has committed a serious offence and in case, at this stage, if he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the instant bail petition may be dismissed.
4. I have heard the learned counsel for the petitioner, learned Additional Advocate General for the State and gone through the records, including the police report, carefully.
5. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent residents of the place and neither in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence nor in a position to flee from justice. He has argued that no fruitful purpose will be served by sending him behind the bars. He has further argued that the instant petition may be allowed and the petitioner may also be enlarged on bail.
6. On the other hand, learned Additional Advocate General has argued that the petitioner has committed a serious crime and in case, at this stage, if he is enlarged on bail, he may tamper with the prosecution evidence and may also flee from justice, so it is prayed that the bail application of the petitioner may be dismissed.
7. In rebuttal, the learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner is permanent resident of the place, neither in a position to flee from justice nor in a position to tamper with the prosecution evidence. He has further argued that the custody of the petitioner is not at all required by the police for investigation. The petitioner is joining and co-operating in the investigation, so the present bail application may be allowed
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.