Vipan Kumar Vs State of Hp

For the Applicant : Applicant in person with Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate with Mr. Tarun Brakta, Advocate. For the Respondent : Mr. H.S. Rawat, Additional Advocate General with Mr. Rohit Sharma and Ms. Ranjna Patial, Deputy Advocate General, assisted by S.I. Sanjay Kumar, Police Station, Sadar, Una, H.P.

¶13

Virender Singh, Judge

¶14

The applicant has filed the present application, under Section 482 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (hereinafter referred to as ‘the BNSS’)

¶15

2 2025:HHC:30705

¶16

in case FIR No. 228/2025, dated 16.7.2025, registered under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘the IPC”), with Police Station, Sadar Una, H.P.

¶17

By way of the present application, the applicant has sought the indulgence of this Court to direct the Investigating Officer/Police, to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest, in the above-noted FIR, as, he is apprehending his arrest, in the said case.

¶18

According to the applicant, he is innocent person and has falsely been implicated, in this case.

¶19

As per the case of the applicant, there is no prima-facie case against him and he has been made scapegoat, in the present case.

¶20

The FIR is also stated to have been registered, in violation of provisions of Section 97 of the Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act, as permission has not been sought before registration of the FIR.

¶21

3 2025:HHC:30705

¶22

It has been pleaded that the Assistant

¶23

Registrar, Cooperative Societies Una, vide office order dated 26.7.2024, has ordered special audit of the Badoli Cooperative Society, for the years 2000 to 2022 and report has been submitted by the Auditors.

¶24

Highlighting the findings of the audit report,

¶25

it has been prayed that no case is made out against the applicant.

¶26

According to the applicant, the present case is nothing, but case of rendition of accounts and to fix the liability of the person, as per the provisions of Himachal Pradesh Cooperative Societies Act.

¶27

On the basis of above facts, Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr Tarun K. Brakta, Advocate, appearing for the applicant, has given certain undertakings, on behalf of the applicant, for which, he is ready to abide by, in case, any direction is issued under Section 482 of the BNSS.

¶28

4 2025:HHC:30705

¶29

When, put to notice, the Police has filed

¶30

status report, disclosing therein, that on 16.7.2025, one Swaran Chand, President of the Badoli, Krishi Sewa Sehkari Sabha Samiti, has moved a complaint, before the Police, disclosing therein, that in the audit report, financial irregularities were found, in the accounts of the Society, due to Secretary Vipan Kumar (applicant).

¶31

9.1 The FIR has been sought to be registered on the ground that Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Una and Managing Committee has got conducted special audit, for the period w.e.f. 1.4.2000 to 31.3.2022 and annual audit for the years 2022-23 and 2023-24 and as per the audit report, financial irregularities were found in the working of the society.

¶32

9.2 It has been mentioned in the complaint that as per the audit report, the Secretary, Vipan Kumar (applicant) has embezzled an amount of Rs. 4,84,52,730.69/-, w.e.f. 2000 to 8.8.2024 and prepared the forged documents. In this regard, the Managing

¶33

5 2025:HHC:30705

¶34

Committee has also issued notice to the Secretary to make the payment, but, he has not deposited the amount.

¶35

9.3 On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to take action against the Secretary Vipan Kumar (applicant), upon which, Police registered FIR under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 IPC.

¶36

9.4 Initially, investigation was conducted by S.I. Sanjay Kumar, who has taken into possession the proceedings book, pronote and register of members. Statements of witnesses were recorded.

¶37

9.5 During investigation, it has been found that the Badoli Krishi Sewa Sehkari Samiti has got conducted re-audit, for the years 2000-2024, through Assistant Registrar, Cooperative Societies, Una. In order to obtain the same, correspondence was made. It has also been found in the proceedings book that in the resolution, which was passed by the Assistant Registrar to advance loans, Secretary Vipan Kumar (applicant) has made

¶38

6 2025:HHC:30705

¶39

cuttings/over-writings and he had changed the loan amount.

¶40

9.6 It has also been found in the proceedings book that Secretary, Vipan Kumar (applicant), without taking into confidence the committee members and without getting the previous loans recovered, used to issue new loans, whereas, till recovery of the previous loans, new loan cannot be issued. As such, applicant Vipan Kumar is stated to have violated the Rules and advanced loans to various persons.

¶41

9.7 As per the status report, in the re-audit, it has also been found that Vipan Kumar has made cutting/over-writing over 38 pronotes and prepared the forged documents and 40 loans are stated to have been advanced, without pronote. He has also recovered less amount of interest, which, as per the report, is Rs.1,55,90,377/- and from 24 persons, exorbitant rate of interest was recovered. The said amount is stated to be Rs. 9,23,143/- Not only this, the applicant is stated

¶42

7 2025:HHC:30705

¶43

to have advanced loan of Rs. 60,94,500/- to himself, as well as, to his relatives.

¶44

9.8 As per the said status report, interim protection was granted to the applicant and the matter was adjourned, for 31.7.2025.

¶45

9.9 On 31.7.2025, Police filed fresh status report, disclosing therein, that the correspondence was made to the bankers of the society to provide the details. As per the details provided by the bankers of the society, in the bank account of the society at Dhusada, a sum of Rs. 1,19,020/- was available, the Basal KCC bank was having a sum of Rs. 40789/- and in another account of the same branch, a sum of Rs. 1,16,095/- was found. In Punjab National Bank, Nari, a sum of Rs.1708/- and in the KCC, Jhaleda, a sum of Rs. 2658 was found. Thereafter, the matter were adjourned to 7.8.2025.

¶46

9.10 On 7.8.2025, fresh status report has been

¶47

filed, in which, it has been pleaded that the inquiry is

¶48

8 2025:HHC:30705

¶49

pending against the applicant with the competent authority.

¶50

9.11 According to the further stand of the Police, in case, interim order is made absolute, he may coerce the witnesses and may tamper with the investigation. As such, custodial interrogation of the applicant has been sought. Thereafter, the matter has been adjourned for 21.8.2025, and, subsequently to 28.8.2025.

¶51

9.12 On 28.8.2025, supplementary status report

¶52

was filed, in which, the earlier allegations have been reasserted.

¶53

9.13. In the status report, filed on 4.9.2025, similar stand has been taken.

¶54

9.14 On the basis of above facts, a prayer has been made to dismiss the application.

¶55

It has been mentioned in the status reports that as per the audit report, the applicant has advanced loan to the persons, who have not cleared the previous loans, and as per the bye laws of the society, only the

¶56

9 2025:HHC:30705

¶57

persons, who have cleared their previous loans, are entitled to new loan. Not only this, from some persons, the applicant has charged less interest, whereas, from some persons, more interest has been charged. The record, from where, the Police has taken this stand, is with the Police and the role attributed to the applicant, would be proved during trial.

¶58

Although, in the status report(s), custodial interrogation of the applicant has been sought, but the purpose of custodial interrogation has not been elaborated. For police custody, the Police has to make out a case, as the applicant has approached this Court, under Section 482 of BNSS, seeking direction to the Police/I.O. to release him on bail, in the event of his arrest.

¶59

The applicant is permanent resident of District Una, as such, it cannot be apprehended that in case, the interim order is made absolute, he may not be available for trial.

¶60

10 2025:HHC:30705

¶61

No doubt, the trial of the applicant will take sufficient long time, and dismissal of the application, would be nothing, but remanding the applicant to police/judicial custody, whereas, it is no longer resintegra that pre-trial punishment is prohibited, under the law.

¶62

Considering all these facts, the interim order dated 24.7.2025, passed by this Court, is hereby made absolute. Therefore, it is ordered that the applicant be released on bail, in the event of his arrest, in case FIR No. 228 of 2025, dated 16.7.2025, registered with Police Station, Sadar Una, District Una, H.P. under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468 and 471 IPC, on his furnishing personal bond, in the sum of 5₹ 0,000/-, with one surety of the like amount, to the satisfaction of the Investigating Officer. This order, however, shall be subject to the following conditions :

¶63

a) That the applicant will join the investigation of the case, as and when, called for, by the Investigating Officer, in accordance with law;

¶64

11 2025:HHC:30705

¶65

b) That the applicant will not leave India, without prior permission of the Court;

¶66

c) That the applicant will not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person, acquainted with the facts of the case, so as to dissuade him/her from disclosing such facts to the Investigating Officer or the Court; and

¶67

d) That the applicant shall regularly attend the trial Court on each and every date of hearing and if prevented by any reason to do so seek exemption from appearance by filing appropriate application.

¶68

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 application.

¶69

It is made clear that the respondent-State is at liberty to move an appropriate application, in case, any of the bail conditions, is found violated by the applicant.

¶70

(Virender Singh) Judge

¶71

September 9, 2025 Kalpana

Vipan Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Vipan Kumar v. State of Hp

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Sudhir Hudda and Ors. Vs State of Hp

Budhi Prakash @ Ramesh Chand and Others Vs State of Hp and Another

Padam Prakash Vs State of Hp

Mohit Kumar Vs State of Hp

Harnoor Tuli Vs State of Hp

Ram Saran Vs Hem Chand Thakur