Dismissed

Gurjant Singh Dhillon v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Allahabad HC18 Jun 2024ABAIL/1333/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Allahabad High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail application under Section 438 CrPC. The judge held that the absconding applicant, charged with forgery and cheating involving a company led to illegal gains, was acting as the mastermind of the offense and had no entitlement to bail.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail application dismissed.

Gurjant Singh Dhillon vs State of U.P. Thru. Addl… — Cheating and Forgery | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC-LKO:57343

¶2

Court No. - 14 Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 1333 of 2024 Applicant :- Gurjant Singh Dhillon Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

¶3

Counsel for Applicant :- Pranshu Agrawal,Chandan Srivastava Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Abhishek Misra,Rishabh Pandey

¶4

Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J.

¶5

The present bail application under Section 438 Cr.PC. has been filed seeking anticipatory bail in case crime/FIR No. 34/2024, under Sections 381/409/419/420/467/468/471/506 I.P.C., P.S. Sarojini Nagar, District Lucknow.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned AGA for the State as well as learned counsel for the complainant.

¶7

Supplementary counter affidavit filed by the learned counsel for the informant along with vakalatnama is taken on record.

¶8

Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the applicant along with co-accused after hatching criminal conspiracy forged the board resolution dated 01.10.2022 and cheated and misappropriated the property of the informant's company i.e. Radiant Buildcon Private Limited. It has been further submitted that as many as 11 flats were sold on the basis of the forged resolution and total consideration amount of all the flat was shown Rs. 2,75,00,000/- as per the registry which is a very meager amount, however, the informant's company has received only Rs. 1,05,00,000/- (Rs. 95,50,000/- from the applicant and Rs. 9,50,000/- from the son of the applicant).

¶9

It has been further submitted by the learned counsel for the complainant that apart from the fact that more than half of the

¶10

consideration amount has been usurped, the major offence committed by the applicant is the offence of forging the resolution of the company dated 01.10.2022 which is punishable with life.

¶11

It has been further submitted that the applicant is not the bonafide purchaser which is evident from the fact that he got the other two commercial properties transferred in the name of Mandeep Kaur and Surjeet Kaur (co-accused) wherein he is the witness. He lastly submits that from this it can be easily inferred that the applicant was actively involved in the crime in question and is rather a mastermind of the offence.

¶12

Learned AGA has also submitted that the accused-applicant was given notice under Section 160/91 Cr.P.C., however, he has not turned up. He is absconding. The investigation is still pending.

¶13

Perusal of the record shows that prima facie the applicant in conspiracy with co-accused Rohit after being aware that he was not having any right to sell the properties of the informant's company got those flats registered in his name at a very marginal value which resulted in illegal gain to the applicant as well as to the co-accused persons and loss to the informant.

¶14

On due consideration to the submission made by the learned counsel for the complainant as well as by the learned AGA, so also considering the fact that the applicant is absconding; he is not cooperating in the trial; offences under Section 467 IPC is punishable with life, I am not inclined to enlarge the applicant on anticipatory bail.

¶15

Accordingly, the anticipatory bail application of the applicant is hereby dismissed .

¶16

Order Date :- 22.8.2024 R.C.

¶17

Digitally signed by :- RAM CHANDER YADAV High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench

Gurjant Singh Dhillon v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Gurjant Singh Dhillon v. State of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Home Lko.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Sanjeev Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Srcy. Home Deptt. Lko

Mohd. Irshad vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. Lko.

Rakesh Kumar Tiwari vs State of U.P. Thru. the Prin. Secy. Home Lko

Somin vs State of U.P. Thru Secy. Home Deptt. Lko

Veer Vikram Singh vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Deptt. U.P. Lko. and 3 Others

Vasudeo Pathak vs State of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Youth Welfare Lko. and 3 Others