Full Text
Translation output
$-1,2, 7& 8 HIGH COURT OF DELHI
BAIL APPLN. 832/2015
PIAJESH SINGH Petitioner
Through: MrJ.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with Mr.R.M.Dubey and Ms.Vaneesa Singh, Advocates.
BAIL APPLN. 832/2015
PIAJESH SINGH Petitioner
Through: MrJ.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with Mr.R.M.Dubey and Ms.Vaneesa Singh, Advocates.
VERSUS
STATE (NCT OF DELHI) Respondent
Through: Mr.M.P.Singh, APP.
Mr.Javed Ali, Advocate for the complainant.
SI Vikash, P.S.Baba HaridaNagar.
Through: Mr.M.P.Singh, APP.
Mr.Javed Ali, Advocate for the complainant.
SI Vikash, P.S.Baba HaridaNagar.
BAIL APPLN. 833/2015
PRAKASH GRANDER GAUR Petitioner
Through: MrJ.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with
PRAKASH GRANDER GAUR Petitioner
Through: MrJ.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with
VERSUS
SI Vikash, P.S.Baba Harida Nagar.
BAIL APPLN. 834/2015
MOHD YAKOOB Petitioner
Through: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with 2015:DHC:10571 u
MOHD YAKOOB Petitioner
Through: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with 2015:DHC:10571 u
VERSUS
STATE(NCT OF DELHI) Respondent
BAIL APPLN. 836/2015
RAJIV KUMAR Petitioner
Through: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with
RAJIV KUMAR Petitioner
Through: Mr.J.P.Sengh, Sr.Advocate with
VERSUS
COl^M:
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
14.07.2015 All the applications have been heard together and a common order is being passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an absolutely false and concocted case has been lodged against them. There is a dispute with respect to money which the petitioners have been fraudulently induced to deposit in a scheme floated by the complainant. s
It has been specifically averred by the petitioners that they have been duped ofa huge amount ofmoney.
For the redressal of their grievances, the petitioners and other accused persons have filed complaint before the police but no case uptil now has been registered.
An application has been moved under Section 156(3) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for a direction to the police for institution ofthe case against the complainant.
As the allegation stands complainant was taken to Noida, on gun point and was forcibly made to sign the empty leaves of the cheque book which he was in possession of There are allegations of assault andthreatandtaking away of the vehicle of the complainant.
The counsel for the complainant, on the contrary, assertsthat his vehicle was found to be parked somewhere near the police station after the petitioners were granted interim protection by order of this
Court dated 30.4.2015.
The status report has been filed.
Perused the status report.
It is submitted on behalf of the State that after the interim protection was given to the petitioners, they have joined the investigations.
The status report does not include the facts with respect to some of the petitioners having filed a case against the complainant. Be that as it may, there appears to be a dispute ofmoney between the parties.
It has further been submitted that the cheques were voluntarily signed by the complainant and the filing ofthis case is a ploy to create a defence in cases ofdishonour of cheques.
Considering the nature and circumstances ofthe case, this Court is incHned to allow the prayer ofthe petitioners.
Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of their arrest on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, one such surety to be a close relative of the petitioners to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer cum SHO concerned, subject to the condition that the petitioners would join the investigation and would not cause any impediment in the police bringing the investigation process to a logical conclusion. The petitioners would not threaten the complainant or would intimidate any one of the persons who could throw light on the prosecution version for unravelling the truth.
With these observations, the applications stand disposedof
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JULY 14,2015 k
HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHUTOSH KUMAR
14.07.2015 All the applications have been heard together and a common order is being passed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that an absolutely false and concocted case has been lodged against them. There is a dispute with respect to money which the petitioners have been fraudulently induced to deposit in a scheme floated by the complainant. s
It has been specifically averred by the petitioners that they have been duped ofa huge amount ofmoney.
For the redressal of their grievances, the petitioners and other accused persons have filed complaint before the police but no case uptil now has been registered.
An application has been moved under Section 156(3) of the
Code of Criminal Procedure for a direction to the police for institution ofthe case against the complainant.
As the allegation stands complainant was taken to Noida, on gun point and was forcibly made to sign the empty leaves of the cheque book which he was in possession of There are allegations of assault andthreatandtaking away of the vehicle of the complainant.
The counsel for the complainant, on the contrary, assertsthat his vehicle was found to be parked somewhere near the police station after the petitioners were granted interim protection by order of this
Court dated 30.4.2015.
The status report has been filed.
Perused the status report.
It is submitted on behalf of the State that after the interim protection was given to the petitioners, they have joined the investigations.
The status report does not include the facts with respect to some of the petitioners having filed a case against the complainant. Be that as it may, there appears to be a dispute ofmoney between the parties.
It has further been submitted that the cheques were voluntarily signed by the complainant and the filing ofthis case is a ploy to create a defence in cases ofdishonour of cheques.
Considering the nature and circumstances ofthe case, this Court is incHned to allow the prayer ofthe petitioners.
Let the petitioners be released on bail in the event of their arrest on furnishing a bond of Rs.25,000/- with two sureties of the like amount, one such surety to be a close relative of the petitioners to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer cum SHO concerned, subject to the condition that the petitioners would join the investigation and would not cause any impediment in the police bringing the investigation process to a logical conclusion. The petitioners would not threaten the complainant or would intimidate any one of the persons who could throw light on the prosecution version for unravelling the truth.
With these observations, the applications stand disposedof
ASHUTOSH KUMAR, J JULY 14,2015 k
JUDGMENT