Grant of anticipatory bail based on refutation of allegations and specific conditions under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT

Raj Mohan Singh, J. - The case has been taken up for hearing through video conferencing.

2. Petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. in case bearing FIR No.07 dated 21.07.2020 under Sections 409, 420, 465, 466, 467, 468, 471 IPC and 13 (1) (a) read with Section 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act registered at Police Station Vigilance Bureau Range, Jalandhar.

3. Allegations against the petitioner are that he in his personal capacity without obtaining sanction from the competent authority had issued two receipts from receipt book No.369 under his signature vide receipt No.25/369 dated 07.08.2019 in the sum of Rs.25,000/- and receipt No.36/369 dated 04.09.2019 in the sum of Rs.25,000/- in respect of plot No.161A, Scheme No.3 and has not deposited the said amount in Trust Funds.

4. Further allegations are that two drafts No.244419 for a sum of Rs.35,000/- and draft No.244421 for a sum of Rs.35,000/- were also recovered from him for which no receipt was issued by the competent authority and the amount of said drafts was not deposited in the account of the trust. Further allegations are that the petitioner of his own executed the sale deed of four plots in the office of Sub Registrar, Phagwara by forging the signature of E.O. and therefore, he being a public servant has cheated and caused financial loss to the Government exchequer.

5. Learned counsel for the petitioner submitted that two drafts in respect of disputed receipts were in respect of nonconstruction fee charged from one Pankaj Kalra in order to execute sale deed from the Improvement Trust. The amount had already been returned to said Pankaj Kalra and Pankaj Kalra had no objection in respect of these two receipts. The amount was returned to aforesaid Pankaj Kalra on oral orders of the Chairman, Improvement Trust, Phagwara. After getting the amount, he moved an application to Jalandhar Improvement Trust stating that he is ready to deposit the entire nonconstruction fee of Rs.2 lacs approximately.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that the amount under demand drafts was not encashed by the petitioner. The demand drafts in the name of Improvement Trust could not be encashed by anyone except the payee in whose favour the drafts were prepared. The sale deeds do not bear the signatures of the petitioner. The petitioner only appeared for the registration of the same. The E.O. at the behest of Chairman, Improvement Trust has sent a wrong and baseless letter against the petitioner for registration of FIR. The vendees of the sale deed have not made any complaint till date nor the sale deeds carried the signatures of the petitioner in any manner. Money of the Improvement Trust is still lying with the trust and no recovery is to be effected from the petitioner. The petitioner has not executed any sale deed nor has received any amount. Petitioner never encashed the drafts nor has altered any document thereby cheating anyone.

7. Learned counsel for the petitioner further submitted that before registration of FIR, Improvement Trust wrote letter No.646 dated 12.12.2019 to the Director, Local Government, Punjab Chandigarh on the subject of commission of embezzlement by the petitioner. Thereafter vide serial No.5 dated 03.01.2020, office of Improvement Trust Town, Phagwara wrote letter to SSP, Vigilance Bureau, Kapurthala on the same subject matter. Thereafter, a letter No.427-P dated 18.02.2020 was issued by Senior Superintendent of Police, Kapurthala to Chairman, Improvement Trust in respect of offence of cheating by the petitioner. Petitioner has referred to letter No.463 dated 18.09.2019 issued by the office of Improvement Trust to Tehsildar, Phagwara thereby giving authority letter to the petitioner for appearing personally on behalf of the Executive Officer to execute the sale deed. Similarly letters bearing No.465 dated 18.09.2019 and 466 dated 18.09.2019 were also issued by the Improvement Trust in favour of Tehsildar, Ph