ORDER

Bail petitioner namely Shahi Mahatma, who is behind the bars since 12.1.2022, has approached this court in the instant proceedings filed under S.439 CrPC, for grant of regular bail in case FIR No.35, dated 19.10.2020 under Ss. 406, 420 and 120-B IP registered at Police Station CID Bharari, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

2. Status report stands filed, perusal whereof reveals that on 19.10.2020, complainant, Lok Pal Singh, vide complaint addressed to the Additional Director-General of Police, CID, Himachal Pradesh, alleged that the bail petitioner, Shahi Mahatma alongwith Pradeep Kumar and Suchit Kumar purchased apple crop from him and other orchardists. With a view to discharge their liability, they issued some cheque(s). He further alleged that neither the payment in cash ever came to made to them by the persons named herein above, nor cheques issued by them were honoured by the banks concerned, rather the same were dishonoured by the Banks. In the aforesaid background, FIR detailed herein above, came to be lodged against the present bail petitioner and other two persons namely Pradeep and Suchit Kumar. Persons namely Pradeep Kumar and Suchit Kumar already stand enlarged on bail, whereas, present bail petition is behind bars since 12.1.2022. Since investigation in the case is complete and challan stands filed in the competent court of law, petitioner has approached this court in the instant petition for grant of regular bail.

3. While fairly admitting factum with regard to filing of challan in the competent court of law, Mr. Sudhir Bhatnagar, learned Additional Advocate General, contends that though nothing remains to be recovered from the present bail petitioner, but keeping in view the gravity of offence alleged to have been committed by him, prayer having been made on his behalf for grant of bail deserves outright rejection. While making this court peruse the record, learned Additional Advocate General states that there is overwhelming evidence adduced on record, suggestive of the fact that the bail petitioner, firstly fraudulently opened bank account of Suchit Kumar and thereafter issued cheques to many orchardists for the crop allegedly purchased by him for further sale in the market. Mr. Bhatnagar, further states that the crop amounting to Rs. 40,82,025/- has been fraudulently purchased by bail petitioner in connivance with Pradeep and Suchit Kumar, but till date not even a single penny has been paid by him to the orchardists. He further states that the cheques issued by present bail petitioner and other accused persons, stand dishonoured as such, it would not be in the interest of justice to enlarge him on bail, who in the event of his being enlarged on bail, may not only flee from justice but may also tamper with the evidence.

4. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record, this court finds that the complainant named herein above vide complaint dated 19.10.2020 alleged that present bail peitioner and two other persons namely Pradeep Kumar and Suchit Kumar purchased apple from complainant and other orchardists in the year 2020 and with a view to discharge their liablity issued cheques as detailed in the FIR. All the cheques issued by petitioner and other co- accused stand dishonoured and as such, complainant filed proceedings under S.138 of the NI Act in the competent court of law and same are pending adjudication. As per investigation, present bail peitioner with a view to cheat complainant and other orchardists, firstly got the bank account of co-accused Suchit Kumar opened fraudulently and thereafter he, after having purchased apple crop, isued cheques to complainant and other orchardists but such cheques were dishonoured. As per investigation crop worth Rs.40,82,025/- was fraudulently purchased by the present bail peitioner in connivance with other persons namely Pradeep Kumar and Suchit kumar but such fact is yet to be established on record by leading cogent and convincing evidece. Interesti