Back
2019 Supreme(P&H) 2690
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J.
Ram Saroop Aggarwal - Appellant
Versus
State Of Haryana - Respondent
CRM-M No. 36607 of 2018 (O&M)
Decided On : 19-08-2019
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Anticipatory Bail
Act Referred
INDIAN PENAL CODE : S.406, S.420, S.120(b)
Headnote
Anticipatory Bail - Criminal Breach of Trust and Cheating - The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail based on the petitioner's active participation in the criminal breach of trust and cheating, despite his age and health condition.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed for anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for a case involving Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The petitioner claimed to have no involvement in the business of the main accused and cited his age and deteriorating health condition.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the petitioner, despite being 80 years old and claiming no involvement in the business, actively participated in the criminal breach of trust and cheating, involving a scam of more than Rs. 39 Crores. The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail, stating that custodial interrogation was required to unearth the truth.
Issues: The main issue was whether the petitioner's age and health condition warranted anticipatory bail despite his active participation in the criminal breach of trust and cheating.
Ratio Decidendi: The court considered the petitioner's age and health condition as relevant factors but ultimately focused on the petitioner's active involvement in the criminal activities, leading to the dismissal of the petition for anticipatory bail.
Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail, emphasizing the need for custodial interrogation due to the petitioner's active participation in the criminal breach of trust and cheating.
Bipan Ghai, Senior Advocate assisted by Paras Talwar, Advocate, for the Appellant; Arun Beniwal, DAG and G.S. Sullar, Advocate, for the Respondent
JUDGMENT/ORDER
Mahabir Singh Sindhu, J. - Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C., 1973 for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case bearing FIR No. 348 dated 26.10.2015, under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short IPC) (Section 120B, IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Ambala Cantt.
2. The sole contention raised on behalf of the petitioner is that he is 80 years of age and his health condition is deteriorating day-by-day.
3. Learned State Counsel, on instructions from S.I. Naresh Kumar, has submitted that petitioner is not co-operating with the Investigating Officer despite numerous opportunities.
4. Heard both sides and perused the paper-book.
5. This Court, on 27.08.2018, passed the following order:-
"Heard.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner is father of Ashok Aggarwal, who is main accused. He is 80 years of age and has no concern with business of Ashok Aggarwal. He has been named only to put pressure on other accused.
Notice of motion for 20.11.2018.
Petitioner is directed to surrender before the police and join investigation within two weeks. In the event of his arrest being required, he shall be released on interim bail till the next date, subject to his furnishing bonds to the satisfaction of Arresting Officer. However, he shall abide by the terms and conditions as envisaged under Section 438(2)(i) to (iv) Cr.P.C. failing which he shall lose the benefit of interim bail allowed to him.
Be listed alongwith CRM-M-20063-2018."
6. As per affidavit dated 24.07.2019 of Mr. Manoj Yadava, Director General of Police, Haryana, filed in the connected case bearing CRM-M No. 20063 of 2018, an amount of more than G.S. Sullar, Advocate 80 Lakh has been transferred in the account of petitioner by his son/co-accused and as such, his connivance for the commission of offence is duly proved at this stage. Thus, the contention raised on behalf of the petitioner while issuing notice of motion on 27.08.2018 that he has no concern with the business of his son/co-accused Ashok Aggarwal is misplaced and without any substance.
7. Sufficient opportunities have already been granted to the petitioner to co-operate with the Investigating Officer, but he is not coming forward to join the investigation while taking the plea of his old age.
8. No doubt, the age of the petitioner is a relevant factor for consideration of his prayer for pre-arrest bail, but the facts of the case clearly reveal that he along with his son/co-accused has committed the criminal breach of trust and cheated to more than 300 defence personnel and swindled their hard earned money, running into more than Rs. 39 Crores.
9. A bare perusal of details, provided regarding the 28 bank accounts of all the accused, further reveal that in bank Account No. 30473305375, maintained by the petitioner with State Bank of India, Ambala Cantt., an amount of Rs. 89,64,500/- has been transferred during the period 21.02.2015 to 07.10.2015 on different occasions. The modus operandi of the accused is that petitioner along with Ashok Aggarwal and Manoj Aggarwal used to make entries of the amount received from the victims; affix the stamp of Firm (WET CANTEEN, 14 (1) ARMD BDE) and put the signatures on the pocket diary as token of receipt of the money. During investigation, it has been found that petitioner actively participated in the commission of offence along with other co-accused and an amount of more than Rs. 39 Crores had been transferred into 28 different bank accounts, pertaining to their family members as described in Chart, attached with aforesaid affidavit of DGP, Haryana.
10. Keeping in view the facts that present scam is running into more than Rs. 39 Crores and an amount of more than Rs. 80 Lakh had been transferred in the account of petitioner, but despite sufficient opportunities, he is not cooperating with the investigation of the case, therefore, his custodial interrogation is required to unearth the same. Hen
