Registration Of Other Cases Can’t Be Sole Ground To Refuse Bail: Punjab & Haryana High Court Grants Relief To Retd Army Personnel In Fraud Case
Case: Kamal Singh vs. State of Haryana
Coram: Justice Harsh Manuja
Case No.: CRM-M-48825 of 2022
Court Observation: “We are conscious of the fact that the accused are charged with economic offences of huge magnitude. We are also conscious of the fact that the offences alleged, if proved, may jeopardise the economy of the country. At the same time, we cannot lose sight of the fact that the investigating agency has already completed the investigation and the charge sheet is already filed before the Special Judge, CBI, New Delhi. Therefore, their presence in the custody may not be necessary for further investigation. We are of the view that the appellants are entitled to the grant of bail pending trial on stringent conditions in order to ally the apprehension expressed by CBI.”
“Furthermore during investigation it has been found by the investigating agency that a sum of Rs.39 Lakhs was deposited in three different accounts being maintained by the petitioner, and in this regard it can be found out from the paper book that out of the deposit of Rs.39 Lakhs which was shown by the investigating agency, having been deposited in the accounts of the petitioner, majority sum of Rs.31 Lakhs was deposited on which is prior to the date of alleged handing over of the cheques by the representative of the complainant to the son of the petitioner which apparently shows that the majority sum out of Rs.39 Lakhs was never related to the amount later handed over by the complainant to the son of the petitioner or his other family members for the purpose of obtaining work orders for carrying out the constructions of housing project in NSG Campus at Manesar,”
“dismissal of bail applications filed at the instance of those aforementioned co-accused cannot be treated to be fatal for considering the bail application of the petitioner on merits, against whom there is no such direct and categoric allegations of having assisted Parveen Yadav (petitioner’s son) except for bald and vague allegations for knowing everything.”
“Above and beyond, the registration of other cases against the petitioner cannot be taken to be as the sole material consideration for the purpose of declining him the relief of bail. For the purpose of deciding the bail application in hand, the allegations levelled against the petitioner as levelled in the FIR in question have to be primarily seen and considered.”
“It is not in dispute and highlighted that the second respondent is a sitting Member of Parliament facing several criminal cases. It is also not in dispute that most of the cases ended in acquittal for want of proper witnesses or pending trial. As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc.”
Previous Posts
Hindu Succession Act Will Not Come In Way Of Inheritance By Tribal Women: Madras High Court
Keywords
Registration Of Other Cases Can’t Be Sole Ground To Refuse Bail
