SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(P&H) 1282

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Avneesh Jhingan, J.
Rupinder Singh Manku - Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab - Respondent
Criminal Miscellaneous Petition (M) No. 23769 of 2021
Decided On : 07-01-2022

Advocates:
Keshav Pratap Singh, Advocate, Sandeep Kumar, Advocate

The seriousness of economic offences, the deliberate design and cool calculation involved, and the need for a different approach in the matter of bail for economic offences.

Headnote:

Anticipatory Bail - Forgery and Economic Offence - IPC 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 201, 120-B, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended by the P.C. Amendment) Act, 2018 - Sections 7 - [IPC 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 201, 120-B, Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended by the P.C. Amendment) Act, 2018, Section 7] - The court discussed the nature of the land, fabrication of revenue records, registration of POAs, and the petitioner's role in the chain of sale transactions. Key legal provisions such as economic offences, deep-rooted conspiracies, and the seriousness of grave offences affecting the economy were highlighted. The court emphasized the deliberate design and cool calculation involved in economic offences, and the need for a different approach in the matter of bail for economic offences.

Fact of the Case:

The petitioner sought anticipatory bail in a case involving forgery and economic offences related to tampering with revenue records and registration of Power of Attorneys (POAs) for the sale of land.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the petition for anticipatory bail, emphasizing the complexity of the case, the deliberate design and cool calculation involved in economic offences, and the petitioner's role in delaying the investigation by absenting himself from duties.

Issues: The issues involved the nature of the land, fabrication of revenue records, registration of POAs, the petitioner's role in the chain of sale transactions, and the delay in the investigation.

Ratio Decidendi: The court held that no case was made out for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner, emphasizing the seriousness of economic offences and the petitioner's role in delaying the investigation.

Final Decision: The petition for anticipatory bail was dismissed.

JUDGMENT

Avneesh Jhingan, J. - The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.

[2] This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in F.I.R. No. 6, dated 8th May, 2021, under Sections 409, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 477-A, 201 and 120-B of IPC and Section 7 of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 (Amended by the P.C. Amendment) Act, 2018 registered at Vigilance Bureau, Phase-1, Mohali.

[3] As per F.I.R., in connivance with the revenue officials, revenue records of Village Majrian, District Mohali were tampered with. Till the year 1991, the land in dispute was Shamlat Deh Hasab Rasad Jar Khewat in the name of Gram Panchayat as owner which was changed and the land was distributed amongst private persons. Certain new co-sharers were added and shares of existing co-sharers was increased. Thereafter, creating a chain of Power of Attorney [hereinafter 'POA'], sale deeds were executed. The allegations against the petitioner are that he was posted as Joint Sub-Registrar for the period 24th February, 2009 to 8th November, 2010 and 21st July, 2011 to 30th July, 2012 at Majrian and he registered General POAs and POAs of non-existent persons without identification and obtaining required documents on record.

[4] Mr. Keshav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner contends that nature of the land was changed in the year 1991 by fabricating the revenue records, the petitioner was not in service at that time and he is not a beneficiary. It is contended that petitioner is ready to join the investigation.

[5] Mr. Sandeep Kumar, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab, on instructions from Inspector Surender Singh, opposes the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail and submits that POA was registered in favour of Amrik Singh who was a non-existing person and none of his documents are available on record. The petitioner had actively connived for registering the POAs. He played a major role and without his connivance, creation of chain of sale of shamlat deh land could not have been possible. He further submits that the petitioner was reverted to the post of Kanungo and ordered to report to his parent department which he failed to do so. He is absent from his duty since 8th May, 2021 i.e. date of registration of FIR. It is further argued that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary as the record of POAs registered is not available in the Registrar Office. He further submits that without custody of the petitioner, the complete chain cannot be unearthed. It is further argued that Sham Lal, one of the co-accused absconded after getting the bail in another FIR.

[6] Court while dealing with the petition of anticipatory bail exercises restraint from commenting upon the merits of the case. However, in view of issues pressed by learned counsel for the petitioner, same are being dealt with only for the purpose of disposal of present petition.

[7] As per allegations the case in hand has tone and tenor of forgery and of economic offence. In economic offences, there is well knitted and planned web casted by the accused. In present case, the issue is more complex than what it appears at its first blush. Each and every accused including the revenue officials had a specific role for making the transaction successful.

[8] In State of Gujarat Versus Mohanlal Jitamalji Porwal and others (1987) 2 SCC 364, the Supreme Court held as under:-

    "5. ...The entire community is aggrieved if the economic offenders who ruin the economy of the State are not brought to book. A murder may be committed in the heat of moment upon passions being aroused. An economic offence is committed with cool calculation and deliberate design with an eye on personal profit regardless of the consequence to the community. A disregard for the interest of the community can be manifested only at the cost of for feiting the trust and faith of the community in the system to administer justice in an even-handed manner without fear of criticism from the quarters w

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top