Allowed

Mohit Chanana v. State

Delhi HC24 Oct 2019BAIL APPLN./2638/2019

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In a bail application, the Delhi High Court granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner in a cheating case involving commercial dishonesty and unacknowledged security receipt. The court imposed a condition requiring the petitioner to deposit ₹3,50,000, allegedly received from a complainant, with the Registrar before granting relief.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail granted subject to deposit of ₹3,50,000 with the Court Registrar and furnishing of a personal bond and surety.

Mohit Chanana Vs State — Money Laundering | Delhi HC (2019)

¶1

$~38

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

- BAIL APPLN. 2638/2019

¶4

MOHIT CHANANA ..... Petitioner Through: Mr Rohit K. Naagpal and Ms Garima Anand, Advocates.

¶5

versus

¶6

STATE ..... Respondent Through: Mr Amit Gupta, APP for State. SI Vinod Kumar, PS Tilak Nagar.

¶7

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU O R D E R

¶8

¶9

24.10.2019

¶10

The petitioner has filed the present petition, inter alia , praying that he be granted anticipatory bail in connection with FIR No. 0441/2019 under Sections 420/120B of the IPC registered with P.S. Tilak Nagar.

¶11

The status report has been filed. The same indicates that one Sh. Satish Chanana (father of the petitioner) has been carrying on business in the name and style of ‘Laxmi Finance and Nagrik Co-operative Society’. It is alleged that he had collected about ₹1,40,61,375/- from multiple complainants. It is further alleged that the funds collected by him had been transferred in the accounts of his family members and certain properties had been purchased.

¶12

It is stated that as per the bank statement of the petitioner, a sum of ₹3,55,000/- was transferred to his account from the account of one of the complainants (Mr Abdul Wahab).

¶13

It is also stated that a sum of ₹19,40,000/- has been transferred from the account of the petitioner to other accounts.

¶14

Mr Naagpal, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner, states that the petitioner is ready to join the investigation and will answer all questions to the best of his ability.

¶15

Mr Gupta, learned APP appearing for the State, states that apart from the complaint made by Mr Abdul Wahab, there are other persons also who are aggrieved and it does appear that certain payments have been received in the bank account of the petitioner.

¶16

Clearly, the petitioner would be required to fully cooperate with the Investigating Officer and provide all information regarding source of income and entries of the bank accounts etc. However, this Court is not persuaded to accept that the petitioner is required to be arrested at this stage.

¶17

Mr Naagpal also voluntarily states that the amount of ₹3,50,000/-, which was received from Mr Abdul Wahab, shall be deposited with the Registrar of this Court. The concerned Registrar is directed to deposit the said amount in an interest-bearing account. The same would be subject to any further orders passed by this Court.

¶18

In view of the above, the petitioner is granted anticipatory bail on his furnishing a personal bond in the sum of ₹10,000/- and a surety of the like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned Investigating Officer and provide all information as available with him and required by the Investigating Officer.

¶19

In the event the Investigating Officer is of the view that the petitioner is not cooperating and is withholding information, he is at liberty to apply for cancellation of the anticipatory bail granted to the petitioner. The petition is disposed of in the aforesaid terms.

¶20

VIBHU BAKHRU, J

¶21

OCTOBER 24, 2019 RK

Mohit Chanana v. State

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mohit Chanana v. State

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

Similar cases

Kailash Wati Vs State

Ravinder Singh Vs State

Mrs. Sana Khan & Anr. Vs State & Ors.

Bharat Bhai Shankarbhai Patel Vs the State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi)

Shivani Kumari & Anr. Vs State of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Chander Prakash Vs State