Himachal Pradesh High Court
Ketan vs State Of Himachal Pradesh on 10 October, 2023
Bench: Virender Singh
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
CrMPs(M) No. 2448 & 2449 of 2023
.
Decided on : 10.10.2023
CrMP (M) No. 2448 of 2023
Ketan ...Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent
........................................................................................
CrMP (M) No. 2449 of 2023
Pawan Kumar
r ...Applicant
Versus
State of Himachal Pradesh ...Respondent
Coram
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1
For the applicant(s) : Mr. Naveen K. Bhardwaj,
Advocate.
For the respondent(s) : Mr. Mohinder Zharaick,
Additional Advocate General,
with Ms. Leena Guleria,
Deputy Advocate General,
assisted by ASI Hari Chand,
Police Station Dhalli, District
Shimla, H.P.
1
Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? Yes.
::: Downloaded on - 10/10/2023 20:36:19 :::CIS
2
Virender Singh, Judge. (Oral)
.
of 2023, dated 5th September, 2023, the applicants have
filed the above-titled two applications, under Section 438 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as
'CrPC'), with a prayer to direct the Investigating
Officer/Police of Police Station Dhalli, District Shimla, H.P.,
to release them on bail, in the event of their arrest, in the
aforesaid case.
2. As per the record, the said FIR has been
registered, under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian
Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as 'IPC').
3. The applicants have sought the relief, under
Section 438 CrPC, on the ground that they are innocent
persons and have falsely been implicated, in this case.
They have given the brief history, explaining the
circumstances, in which, the FIR in question has been
registered against them.
4. The applicants have also given certain
undertakings, for which, they are ready to abide by, in
case, any direction is issued to the Investigating
Officer/police, under Section 438 CrPC.
.
5. When put to notice, the police has filed the
status report, in this case, disclosing therein that a
complaint was received from SP Office, Shimla, on 5 th
September, 2023, wherein, complainant-Hem Dutt Sharma
has mentioned that he is the owner of vehicle No. HP-63D-
0609, model Ford Freestyle Titanium (hereinafter referred
to as the 'car in question'). The car in question was put to
sale on OLX.
5.1. Thereafter, one person, namely Ketan
approached him, from Hamirpur, for purchasing the car in
question. The said person requested him to bring the car
for test drive at Ghanatti on 14th May, 2023 and apprised
that he will bring the documents, pertaining to sale and
purchase of the vehicle in question. Thereafter, the
complainant, alongwith his son, had gone to 16 Miles, near
Ghanatti. Ketan (applicant in CrMP (M) No. 2448 of 2023)
and his father, Pawan Kumar (applicant in CrMP (M) No.
2449 of 2023) also came there. Applicant-Ketan took the
test drive from 16 Miles to Kali Hatti.
5.2. Thereafter, bargain was struck for a sum of ₹
5,50,000/-, for the sale of the car in question. When, the
.
payment was demanded, applicant-Ketan has replied in
affirmative. On the basis of the said affirmation, the
complainant has signed the agreement to sell, affidavit, no
objection certificate and other blank papers and forms in
favour of applicant-Pawan Kumar.
5.3. After signing the papers, when the payment was
demanded, then, it has been said that the payment will be
made through cheque. As per the complainant, applicant-
Pawan Kumar induced him to believe that he is a
businessman, having sufficient funds in his account, as
such, he issued cheque No. 000002, dated 14 th May, 2023,
in favour of the complainant, drawn at Kotak Mahindra
Bank, Ambala, as full and final payment, for the car in
question. When, the complainant came out of the shop,
after making the payment of refreshment etc., both the
applicants were not found there. Thereafter, the cheque
was deposited by the complainant, in his bank account,
which was also dishonoured.
5.4. It is the further case of the complainant that
both the applicants have taken away the car fraudulently.
.
On the basis of the above fact, a prayer has been made to
take action against them.
5.5. On the basis of the above facts, police registered
the case and the criminal machinery swung into motion. It
is the case of the police that the applicants got the vehicle
in question transferred in their name fraudulently.
6. After perusing the status report, interim
protection was granted to the applicants on 25th
September, 2023, with a direction to them, to appear
before the Investigating Officer, on 27th September, 2023,
at 11.00 a.m., and the matter was adjourned for 29 th
September, 2023.
7. On 29th September, 2023, supplementary status
report has been filed, disclosing therein that despite
directions of this Court, the applicants have not joined the
investigation.
8. In the status reports, the detailed history of the
criminal cases, registered against the applicants, has also
been mentioned, which is as under:
Applicant-Ketan Kumar:
FIR No. 21/15, dated 4th December, 2015,
under Sections 354 506, 34 IPC, wherein the
.
applicant has been acquitted.
Applicant-Pawan Kumar:
1. FIR No. 30/92, dated Pending in
08.05.92, u/s 420 IPC, Court at
PS Bharari, Distt. Ghumarwin
Bilaspur
2. FIR No. 202/95, dated Pending in
04.09.95, u/s 279, 427 Court at
IPC, PS Sarkaghat, Distt. Sarkaghat
r Mandi
3. FIR No. 197/05, dt. Pending in
21.11.05, u/s 419, 420, Court at Dehra
468, 170, 120 (B) IPC,
PS Jawalamukhi, Distt.
Kangra
4. FIR No. 110/07, dt. Pending in
17.09.07, u/s 420 , 465, Court at
467, 471, 120 (B) IPC, Ghumarwin
PS Bharari, Distt.
Bilaspur
5. FIR No. 111/07, dt. Pending in
17.09.07, u/s 420 , 465, Court at
467, 468, 419, 471, 120 Ghumarwin
(B) IPC, PS Bharari,
Distt. Bilaspur
6. FIR No. 135/07, dt. Pending in
17.09.07, u/s 420, 467, Court at
468, 419, 471, 120 (B) Jhandutta
IPC, PS Talai, Distt.
Bilaspur
7. FIR No. 09/08, dt. Pending in
05.07.08, u/s 420, 467, Court at
468, 471, 120 (B) IPC, Jogindernagar
PS Padhar, Distt. Mandi
8. FIR No. 196/08, dt. Pending in
05.07.08, u/s 467, 468, Court at
471IPC, PS Sarkaghat, Sarkaghat
Distt. Mandi
9. FIR No. 273/08, dt. Pending in
.
05.07.08, u/s 420, 467, Court at
468, 471, 120 (B) IPC, Sundernagar
PS Sundernagar, Distt.
Mandi
10. FIR No. 319/08, dt. Pending in
05.07.08, u/s 420, 467, Court at Mandi
468, 471, 120 (B) IPC,
PS Sadar Mandi, Distt.
Mandi
11. FIR No. 65/09, dt. -
18.02.09, u/s 467, 468,
471, 120 (B) IPC, PS
Sadar Hamirpur, Distt.
rMandi
12. FIR No. 26/11, dt. Pending in
19.02.11, u/s 420, 120 Court at
(B) IPC, PS Dharamshala
Dharamshala, Distt.
Kangra
13. FIR No. 163/11, dt. Pending in
05.07.11, u/s 420, 406, Court at
120 (B) IPC, PS Sadar Bilaspur
Bilaspur
14. FIR No. 113/13, dt. Pending in
12.12.13, u/s 420, 406, Court at
120 (B) IPC, PS Bharari, Ghumarwin
Distt. Bilaspur
15. FIR No. 249/13, dt. Pending in
18.12.13, u/s 420, 120 Court at
(B) IPC, PS Ghumarwin, Ghumarwin
Distt. Bilaspur
16. FIR No. 11/23, dt. Pending in
01.02.23, u/s 174(A) Court at
IPC, PS Bhoranj, Distt. Hamirpur
Hamirpur
9. Despite the interim protection granted to the
applicants, they have not joined the investigation.
.
Meaning thereby, they have no respect for the law and they
are not cooperating with the Investigating Officer, in the
investigation of the case.
10. Since, the vehicle in question is yet to be
recovered, as such, it would be just and appropriate for
this Court to dismiss the bail applications, as, the
custodial interrogation is more result oriented than the
investigation from the person, who is having the protection
of the Court, under Section 438 CrPC, in his favour.
11. Considering all these facts, both the bail
applications are dismissed.
12. Any of the observations, made hereinabove,
shall not be taken as an expression of opinion, on the
merits of the case, as these observations, are confined,
only, to the disposal of the present bail applications.
( Virender Singh )
Judge
October 10, 2023
( rajni )
