Atul Jaiin vs State (Govt. Of Nct Of Delhi)
2019 Latest Caselaw 5477 Del

$~
* IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
                      Judgment delivered on: 07.11.2019
+      BAIL APPLN. 2726/2019
       ATUL JAIN                                      ..... Petitioner
                           Through:     Mr. Prakash Priyadarshi,
                                        Mr. S. N. Qureshi &
                                        Mr. Md. Zaved, Advocate.
                           versus
       STATE (GOVT OF NCT OF DELHI)                   ..... Respondent
                           Through      Mr. G. M. Farooqui,
                                        APP for State along with
                                        SI Bijender Kumar,
                                        PS Bhajanpura.

       CORAM:
       HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE BRIJESH SETHI

                               JUDGMENT

BRIJESH SETHI, J.(oral)

1. Vide this order I shall dispose of a bail application filed u/s. 439

CrPC by the petitioner Atul Jain in FIR No. 584/2017 u/s.

419/420/467/468/471/120-B IPC, P.S. Bhajanpura.

2. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner has prayed for bail on the ground

that petitioner is innocent and has been falsely implicated. It is

submitted that FIR was registered on a complaint filed by one Smt.

Manju Pandey who alleged that she was contacted on phone by one

lady by the name of Monika and discussed about insurance policies of

complainant. Complainant informed her that her policies had been

damaged due to spilling of water. She told the complainant that

complainant was entitled for Rs.52 Lacs. Thereafter, one Rahul

Sharma, Dhan Sukhpal, Dushyant Pratap and Ravikant also talked to

complainant. It is alleged that these person obtained around Rs. 28

Lacs from her in a span of 3-4 years which complainant had paid in

different accounts. During the investigation the petitioner was arrested

on 17.01.2018 and after completion of the investigation the

chargesheet was filed.

3. Ld. Counsel for the petitioner submitted that petitioner does not

have even any remote connection with the offences as alleged by the

prosecution and in entire chargesheet the prosecution failed to

establish the connection of the petitioner with the offences as alleged.

He further submitted that petitioner is young person and investigation

has already been completed, hence no fruitful purpose will be served

by keeping him in JC. Petitioner undertakes not to influence the

prosecution evidence and will not misuse the concession of bail in any

manner. The petitioner had moved an application u/s 439 CrPC

seeking regular bail before the Ld. Trial Court. However the said

application of the petitioner was dismissed by the Ld. Trial Court vide

order dated 18.07.2019. The co-accused persons namely Ritu and

Ravikant have already been enlarged on bail by the Ld. Trial Court

vide orders dated 20.01.2018 & 22.06.2019 respectively. It is

therefore, prayed petitioner be granted bail, in the interested of justice.

4. Ld. APP for the state has opposed the bail application on the

ground that allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature.

Petitioner is involved in an offence of cheating and forgery along with

his co-accuseds. He has, therefore prayed for dismissal of the bail

application.

5. I have considered the rival submissions. Present case has been

registered on the complaint of Ms. Manju Padey. She has alleged that

she had many insurance policies. She received a phone call by one

lady named Monika Sharma, who submitted that she was speaking

from the Fund Relief Department. The complainant shared the

details of her polices with her on which she (caller) told the

complainant that she had the total fund of Rs. 52 lacs in her polices

and she might get it but she would have to spend some money.

Thereafter one Rahul Sharma, Dhan Sukhpal, Dushyant Pratap and

Ravikant also talked to complainant. As per prosecution, these persons

obtained around Rs. 28 Lacs from her in a span of 3-4 years which

complainant had paid in different accounts. After registration of the

case, the investigation was conducted by SI Prempal, who recorded

the statement of complainant u/s. 161 CrPC, in which she told the

details of the alleged bank account numbers in which she had

transferred the amount. Total six bank accounts were found to be

opened in the name of Dushyant Pratap and his companies. During

investigation, real name of the Dushyant Pratap was came to know as

Atul Jain i.e. petitioner and on 17.01.2018, petitioner Atul Jain @

Dushyant Pratap was arrested. Certificates of 10th & 12th in the name

of Atul Jain and one Adhar Card in the name of Dushyant Pratap were

recovered from his possession. An amount of Rs. 3,21,200/- was

found to be transferred in the ICICI bank A/c. No. 125605000822

petitioner Atul Jain @ Dushyant Pratap. During investigation

petitioner disclosed that he along with co-accused Ravikant had taken

an office on rent at Bharat Complex Mamura Mandi, Noida, UP and

co-accuseds namely Ritu, Rajesh and Ajay were the employees in

their office. Petitioner is previously involved in similar case bearing

FIR No. 41/2016 u/s. 420/406 IPC, PS Kotwali, Distt. Bikaner,

Rajasthan. Keeping in view the above facts and allegations leveled

against the petitioner and his involvement in another case of cheating

& forgery, no grounds for bail are made out. The bail application is,

therefore, dismissed.

BRIJESH SETHI, J

NOVEMBER 07, 2019 AP