Vicky Kumar Dogra vs Union Of J&K And Others
2021 Latest Caselaw 934 j&K

     HIGH COURT OF JAMMU & KASHMIR AND LADAKH
                     AT JAMMU
                                               Reserved on    18.08.2021
                                               Pronounced on: 23 .08.2021

                                               Bail App No. 226/2021
                                               CrlM No. 1376/2021


Vicky Kumar Dogra                                   .....Appellant(s)/Petitioner(s)


                      Through: Mr. Muzaffar Iqbal Khan Advocate


                Vs
Union of J&K and others                                        ..... Respondent(s)


                      Through: Mr. Raman Sharma, AAG

Coram: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJNESH OSWAL, JUDGE
                                 JUDGMENT

1. The petitioner is seeking bail in anticipation of arrest in FIR No.

22/2021 dated 19.07.2021 registered with the Crime Branch for

commission of offence under sections 420, 465, 467, 468 and 120-B

RPC.

2. It is stated in the petition that the petitioner is a social worker and is the

chairman of the trust by the name of M/S Social Women Welfare

Charitable Trust, J&K established for the purpose of social, economic

uplift and welfare services of the children, youth and woman

community especially the backward, downtrodden and destitute. It is

stated that on the basis of false and frivolous complaint stands lodged

against the petitioner herein by 1. Kewal Raj, 2 Ms. Bandna Makhnotra

and Suman Lata, alleging therein that the petitioner has duped and

allured the complainants on the pretext of providing jobs to their wards

in the State and Central Government Departments. Further, that the

husband of one of the complainants is in the police Department and was

continuously harassing the petitioner without any justifiable reason and

the petitioner apprehending arrest moved an anticipatory bail

application before the court of learned 3rd Additional Sessions Judge

Jammu and the learned 3rd. Additional Sessions Judge Jammu vide

order dated 16.06.2020 was pleased to grant anticipatory bail to the

petitioner and later on the said bail application was disposed of, as no

FIR was registered against the petitioner. Thereafter, apprehending his

arrest in false and frivolous FIR mentioned above, the petitioner filed

an application for grant of bail before the court of learned Additional

Sessions Judge Jammu, however, the Court vide order dated 30.07.2021

dismissed the said application. It is submitted by the petitioner that he is

innocent and is ready to abide by all the conditions imposed by the

court in the event of grant of bail.

3. Respondents have filed the response, in which it is stated that a written

complaint was lodged by the complainant namely Suman Lata w/o

Rajender Singh and others in Crime Branch Jammu, wherein they

alleged that suspect Vicky Kumar Dogra i.e. the petitioner herein, is

running NGO in the name and style of Khushi Promotion Group at

Shastri Nagar near Water Tank Jammu. The complainant further

alleged that they were told by him that he has links/contacts for

providing jobs in foreign countries to the educated youth and number of

innocent people fell in his trap. On the assurance of providing

government jobs and sending to the foreign countries, the petitioner

obtained different amounts ranging between ₹2.00 lacs to ₹5.00 lacs per

candidate from them. As the petitioner did nothing so the complainants

approached the petitioner for refunding the amount paid by them but he

kept on avoiding the same and promised that he will provide the jobs to

their wards in the Government Departments. The complainants also

alleged that the petitioner took away ₹5.00 lacss from Suman Lata,

₹3.25 lacs from Kewal Raj, ₹21.30 lacs from Dr Ajit Bajala and ₹ 15.50

lacs from Bandana Makhnotra. In return he had provided them

photocopies of the appointment orders but they came to know that the

petitioner had given them fake/fictitious appointment orders.

4. It is further submitted that the petitioner issued cheque of ₹ 5.00 lacs in

the name of Suman Lata, three cheques each dated 10.05.2020 of ₹ 5.50

lacs, 6.50 lacs and ₹ 7.00 lacs in the name of Dr Ajit. On receipt of

complaint, preliminary verification was conducted and it was prima

facie established that the petitioner was running a trust under the name

and style of M/S Social Women Welfare Charitable Trust and was

organizing camps, programs in different places and under the garb of

this trust, the innocent complainants fell into his trap. During the course

of enquiry, it also came to the fore that the gang is working under the

control and supervision of accused who have lured complainants

intentionally, deliberately and provided them fake and fictitious

appointment orders of different departments like Rashtriya Uchchatar

Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA), Military Engineering Services (MES),

Northern Railway and State Bank of India. In lieu of fake orders, the

petitioner had duped the innocent complainants of their hard earned

money to the tune of ₹47.85 lacs thereby causing wrongful gain to

himself and corresponding loss to the complainants. Accordingly, a

formal FIR was registered on 19.07.2021.

5. During the course of the investigation, the statements of the

complainants have been recorded and the original cheques have been

seized besides the fake appointment orders. It is further stated that the

cheques of different amounts provided by the petitioner to the

complainants, were the amounts which he had obtained in lieu of

providing jobs. However, when the cheques were presented in the

concerned banks, they were not cleared by the bank due to insufficient

funds. It is further stated in the response that during investigation, the

requisite information is being sought from Branch Manager J&K

Grameen Bank in respect of the account existing in the name of M/S

Khushi Promotion Group as well as from the Deputy Commissioner,

Labor Department Jammu about the registration of the above-

mentioned group. It is also stated that in order to ascertain the

genuineness of the appointment orders, information has been sought

from MES but till date no response has been received. Further the

appointment order issued by the petitioner in the name of Bharat Verma

S/o Kewal for the provisional staff, Group C has been reported to be

fake pursuant to the information supplied by the concerned quarter of

the Northern Railway. It is also stated in the response that during the

course of investigation two more complaints poured in from Sh.

Surinder Pal and Sh. Ranjeet Kumar, who too have been duped by the

petitioner. Lastly it is submitted by the respondents that the

investigation in the case is at initial stage and the custodial interrogation

of the petitioner is required for ascertaining relevant material facts of

the case and recovery of the duped money and the gadgets used for

preparation of the fictitious appointment orders prepared by the

petitioner and given to the innocent complainants.

6. Learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the

petitioner has been implicated in a false case and the petitioner is ready

to abide by all the conditions imposed by this Court in the event bail is

granted.

7. Per contra, Mr. Raman Sharma, learned AAG submitted that there are

serious allegations against the petitioner and the investigation in the

case is at initial stage, so the investigation shall be hampered in the

event bail in anticipation of arrest is granted to the petitioner. He further

argued that the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required in the

instant case as material facts are required to be ascertained and

recoveries are to be effected.

8. Heard and perused the record.

9. From the record, it is evident that there are serious allegations against

the petitioner with regard to duping the innocent persons of their hard

earned money on the pretext of providing jobs to them or their wards as

the case may be. The petitioner has duped a sum of ₹ 47.85 lacs from

the complainants for the purpose of providing jobs and in turn handed

over fake appointment orders to them. The petitioner has not only

duped the complainants but lot of other persons also, as during the

pendency of the investigation, the Crime Branch has also received

similar complaints from other persons as well. The complicity of the

petitioner is evident from the fact that he returned the amounts by way

of cheques to the complainants and the cheques were dishonored. So

from the facts on record it is evident that the petitioner has received

huge amounts from the complainants. The investigation is still at initial

stage and there is force in the contention of Mr. Raman Sharma learned

AAG that the gadgets used for the purpose of preparing fake

appointment orders are yet to be recovered. More so, the trail of the

money is also to be investigated. In Sushila Aggarwal v. State (NCT

of Delhi), reported in (2020) 5 SCC 1, Apex Court has held as under:

92. 1. Consistent with the judgment in Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab [Gurbaksh Singh Sibbia v. State of Punjab, (1980) 2 SCC 565 : 1980 SCC (Cri) 465] , when a person complains of apprehension of arrest and approaches for order, the application should be based on concrete facts (and not vague or general allegations) relatable to one or other specific offence. The application seeking anticipatory bail should contain bare essential facts relating to the offence, and why the applicant reasonably apprehends arrest, as well as his side of the story. These are essential for the court which should consider his application, to evaluate the threat or apprehension, its gravity or seriousness and the appropriateness of any condition that may have to be imposed. It is not essential that an application should be moved only after an FIR is filed; it can be moved earlier, so long as the facts are clear and there is reasonable basis for apprehending arrest.

10. So far as the bail application of the petitioner is concerned the same is

absolutely silent with respect to his side of story except that the false

and frivolous FIR has been lodged. It is settled law that while

considering an application for grant of bail in anticipation of arrest,

following factors are required to be considered:

             (i)     the nature and gravity of the accusation,
             (ii)    the antecedents of the applicant,

(iii) the possibility of the applicant to flee from justice,

(iv) where the accusation has been made with the object of injuring or humiliating the applicant by having him so arrested.

11. The allegations against the petitioner are very serious and the manner in

which he has duped number of innocent persons demonstrates the

criminal state of mind of the petitioner and as the huge amount is

involved, so there is likelihood that the petitioner may fled away. More

so, it cannot be said that the accusations have been made against the

petitioner in order to humiliate the petitioner as his conduct speaks for

his criminal activities. The provisions of grant of bail in anticipation of

arrest are not meant for the persons, whose occupation is to dupe the

common man but for the protection of persons who apprehend arrest in

criminal proceedings initiated to wreck vengeance.

12. Viewed thus, there is no merit in the present petition as such the present

petition is dismissed.

(Rajnesh Oswal) Judge Jammu 23.08.2021 Rakesh

Whether the order is speaking: Yes Whether the order is reportable: No