Point of Law: Grant of Bail - Offence of Cheating - Bail is rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on personal liberty of individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of Constitution of India.

JUDGMENT :

Hon’ble Alok Kumar Verma, J.

This bail application has been filed under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of regular bail in connection with FIR No.0178 of 2019, registered with Police Station Haldwani, District Nainital for the offence punishable under Sections 420, 467, 468 &, 471 of I.P.C.

2. An FIR was lodged by the informant Manish Tejwani on 25.05.2019 against the present applicant alleging that he had purchased the property-in-question from the present applicant through registered sale deed dated 16.08.2017 for Rs.25.00 lakhs. When he went for mutation, he came to know that there was no land in the name of the applicant in the property-in-question. He alleged that the applicant made false documents with intent to commit fraud.

3. Heard Mr. D.N. Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicant and Mr. T.C. Agarwal, the learned Deputy Advocate General assisted by Mr. Pankaj Joshi, the learned Brief Holder for the State through video conferencing.

4. Mr. D.N. Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant has not committed any offence; he has been implicated; he was the owner of the land-in-question at the time of the sale deed; the informant obtained the sale deed from the applicant by playing a fraud upon the applicant; he has not paid the entire sale consideration to the applicant; he paid only Rs.11,16,000/- through a cheque; the remaining amount out of total sale consideration to the tune of Rs.25.00 lakhs were not paid to him and to mount a pressure, the informant lodged the impugned first information report against the applicant.

5. Mr. D.N. Sharma, the learned counsel for the applicant further submitted that the informant Manish Tejwani (PW-1) has admitted in his statement that through sale deed, he had become the owner and he had put the pillars on the purchased land, but, he does not know by whom his pillars were removed from the land-in-question. The learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the applicant is a permanent resident of District Nainital and he is in custody since 16.11.2019.

6. Mr. T.C. Agarwal, The learned Deputy Advocate General for the State opposed the bail application. However, he fairly conceded that the informant Manish Tejwani (PW-1) has admitted in his statement before the trial court that he had become the owner of the land-in-question through sale deed dated 16.08.2017 and he had put the pillars on the purchased land.

7. Bail is the rule and committal to jail is an exception. Refusal of bail is a restriction on the personal liberty of the individual, guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India. The object of keeping the accused person in detention during the trial is not punishment. The main purpose is manifestly to secure the attendance of the accused.

8. Having considered the submissions of learned counsel for both the parties and in the facts and circumstances of the case, there is no reason to keep the applicant behind the bars for an indefinite period, therefore, without expressing any opinion as to the merits of the case, this Court is of the view that the applicant deserves bail at this stage.

9. The bail application is allowed.

10. Let the applicant be released on bail on his executing a personal bond and furnishing two reliable sureties, each in the like amount, to the satisfaction of the court concerned.