Back
2020 Supreme(P&H) 1095
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J.
Ajay Denial Anwar - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous (M) No. 20643 of 2020
Decided On : 16-09-2020
Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate, Karan Sharma, Advocate
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the lack of specific allegations in the FIR and reliance on a debatable disclosure statement can influence the court's decision in granting anticipatory bail.
Headnote:
Anticipatory Bail - Fraudulent Immigration - The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner based on the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the reliance on a debatable disclosure statement made by co-accused.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving allegations of fraudulent immigration and cheating under the Indian Penal Code and Immigration Act. The complainant alleged that he was duped of a large sum of money by the accused who promised to send him abroad.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there were no specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and that the petitioner was nominated as an accused based on a disclosure statement made by co-accused, the veracity of which was debatable. As a result, the court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner.
Issues: The issues revolved around the petitioner's involvement in the fraudulent immigration case, the admissibility of the disclosure statement, and the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was influenced by the lack of specific allegations against the petitioner in the FIR and the reliance on a debatable disclosure statement made by co-accused to nominate the petitioner as an accused.
Final Decision: The court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, subject to the petitioner joining the investigation when called upon and cooperating with the Investigating Officer, and abiding by the conditions provided under Section 438 (2) Cr.P.C.
JUDGMENT
Gurvinder Singh Gill, J. - The petitioner Ajay Denial Anwar seeks grant of anticipatory bail in respect of a case registered vide FIR No.9 dated 3.1.2020 at Police Station City Thanesar, District Kurukshetra under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code and Section 10 of Immigration Act.
2. The FIR, in the present case, was lodged at the instance of Manish Kumar, wherein it has been alleged that he has been duped of an amount of Rs.21 lakhs by Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh and Satyawan. It is alleged that the complainant Manish Kumar met Satyawan in February 2019, who represented that he alongwith Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh is doing the work of sending people abroad and in case the complainant desires, he could be sent to America. Being taken in by the said representation, the complainant alongwith his father Krishan went to Satyawan's office and met Satyawan and Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh where they told the complainant and his father Krishan that the complainant would be sent to America in about 15-20 days and for which the complainant would have to incur an expenditure of Rs.21 lakhs. The complainant being allured and taken in by the said representation gave his passport and an advance of Rs.1 lakh, which was deposited in the bank account of Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh. On 5.6.2019, Satyawan informed the complainant that complainant's Visa has been arranged and handed over his passport and air ticket and the complainant was sent to Malaysia and from thereon he was sent to Pipon and then to Cambodia, where he stayed for about 19 days and from Cambodia the complainant was sent to Mexico, where he was caught by the officials of Immigration Department and was sent behind bars, where he was kept confined for 5 months. It is alleged that thereafter Satyawan and Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh called the complainant's father and told him that in case he wanted his son to reach America, then he would have to make a payment of another Rs.20 lakhs and accordingly complainant's father handed over an amount of Rs.21 lakhs to Satyawan on 25.6.2019, which he had arranged from members of his family and friends and ultimately the complainant was deported back to India by Government of Mexico on 25.11.2019.
3. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is nowhere named in the FIR and that the FIR is specifically against two persons namely Satyawan and Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh, who are alleged to have held out a false representation to the complainant for sending him abroad and are alleged to have received an amount of Rs.21 lakhs for the said purpose. It has been submitted that the petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis of a disclosure statement allegedly made by co-accused, who have alleged that an amount of Rs.13 lakhs out of the amount of Rs.21 lakhs paid by the complainant, was passed on to the petitioner.
4. Opposing the petition, the learned State counsel has submitted that since the petitioner is specifically named in the disclosure statement made by coaccused and is also stated to have received an amount of Rs.13 lakhs, no case for grant of bail is made out.
5. I have considered rival submissions addressed before this Court.
6. It is not in dispute that there is not even an iota of allegation against the petitioner in the FIR, who is not even named in the FIR, as the allegations are specifically against two accused only namely Satyawan and Bakshish Singh @ Bagga Singh @ Bawa Singh. The petitioner has been nominated as an accused on the basis a disclosure statement allegedly made by co-accused, the veracity and admissibility of which would be debatable.
7. In these circumstances, when the petitioner is not specifically named in the FIR and is sought to be nominated on the basis of disclosure statement only and there is nothing else on record to show his complicity in the matter, the petition merits accep
