Back
ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT
G.P.Srivastava
MOHIT BHATNAGAR
Versus
STATE OF U P
Decided On : 25 July 2006
Criminal Misc. Bail Application No. 12152 of 2006
Fraud - Import Licenses - The court rejected the bail application of the applicant who was involved in a case of forged import licenses. The applicant, a commission agent, was found to have colluded with others in the fraud.
Fact of the Case:
The applicant, a commission agent, was involved in a case where forged import licenses were purchased by the informant's company. The applicant claimed to have no connection with the alleged transaction, but his statement indicated otherwise.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the applicant was involved in the fraud and colluded with others, as indicated by his statement and the circumstances of the case. No ground for bail was found, and the bail application was rejected.
Issues: The main issue was whether the applicant was involved in the fraud related to forged import licenses and whether there were grounds for bail.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the applicant's statement, which indicated his involvement in the fraud, and the circumstances of the case, leading to the rejection of the bail application.
Final Decision: The bail application of the applicant was rejected.
Heard learned Counsel for the applicant, learned Counsel for the complainant and learned AGA.
2. According to the prosecution case D. E. P. B. (Duty Entitlement Pass book) licences for importing raw materials are issued by D. G. F. T. and LCD. Custom, Government of India. Licenses issued are transferable. The informants Company has been purchasing the aforesaid licenses for the last three years from M/s. Sai Associates. Shri Bhushan Sachdev is the owner of the said firm. In the month of August 2005 the informants company purchased specified licenses as mentioned in the First Information Report. On verification in the month of October, 2005 it was revealed that all the licenses were forged. The Payments in respect of the licenses were made by the informants company to Shivam Enterprises and M/s. Isha Implex, Moradabad. Shri Bhushan Sachdev informed that the aforesaid licenses were given to him by the applicant Mohit Bhatnagar.
3. It is argued by learned Counsel for the applicant that the applicant is a commission agent. He owns a firm in the name of M/s. Sai Solution which is registered with the Income-tax Department. In the said firm the applicant works as a forwarding agent relating to shipping business. He has no connection with the alleged transaction. The statement of the applicant was recorded by the officer of the Revenue Intelligent which is admissible in evidence. The statement is signed by the applicant. The applicant in his statement has stated that the disputed D. E. P. B. licenses were given to him by one Sri R. K. Gupta for sale and he obtained 2% commission thereon. Thereafter he contacted to Shri Bhushan Sahgal and in this way the licenses were sold to the informant, therefore, it cannot be said that the applicant had nothing to do with the matter. He has further admitted that an account was opened in the name of Rajesh and the applicant put his signature as Rajesh. There is no trace of the aforesaid Rajesh.
4. In the circumstances, it appears prima facie that the entire fraud was played by the applicant in collusion with some other person.
5. No ground of bail is made out.
6. This bail application is rejected.
Application rejected.
.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
