Petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for alleged fraud and embezzlement involving Rs.150 crores. Court dismissed the petition as an exceptional case given the accused is a proclaimed offender and absconding, refusing extraordinary relief.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
Crl.M.No.M-34995 of 2010 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-34995 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: December 2, 2010
Surinder Arjun
.....Petitioner
v.
State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.L.M.Gulati, Advocate for the petitioner.
.....
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
Crl.M.No.62233 of 2010
Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions.
Crl.M.No.M-34995 of 2010
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.103, dated 18.7.2007, under Sections 406, 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 380, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station `D' Division Amritsar.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed.
Brief allegations against the petitioner-accused are that petitioner being President and co-accused Rajinder Kumar Bhalla being Secretary of Shri Durgiana Committee, Amritsar, were found indulging in operating bank accounts illegally, unauthorisedly and embezzled lacs of rupees of Shri Durgiana Committee. A complaint in writing was made to Senior Superintendent of Police, Amritsar. It was alleged that they had made embezzlement of Rs.150 crores by making misappropriation of the money offerred at the temple, money and gold offered for kar sewa, grant money of Sanskrit College, selling the land of Gaushala, taking FDRs worth
-2-
Crl.M.No.M-34995 of 2010 (O&M)
Rs.six crores by breaking open the Tosha Khana and by showing loss in the accounts of Bhog Bhandar. The matter was also enquired into by the police authorities.
In view of serious allegations against the petitioner-accused, his application for anticipatory bail was dismissed by the Court of Sessions on 14.12.2007. Thereafter he filed anticipatory bail before this Court, which was dismissed on merit by a coordinate Bench of this Court vide order dated 14.5.2008, passed in Crl.M.No.M-55192 of 2007. He again approached this Court for anticipatory bail in Crl.M.No.M-12706 of 2009, which was also dismissed vide order dated 27.5.2009. He again filed application for anticipatory bail before learned Additional Sessions Judge, Amritsar, which was also dismissed by impugned order dated 3.6.2010.
Hence, it is his third bail application before this Court. Offence was committed in the year 2007. Petitioner-accused has been absconding and has already been declared proclaimed offender. Challan has been filed against co-accused.
Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused.
Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerSurinder Arjun for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
2.12.2010
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail should be granted to a proclaimed offender accused of major fraud and absconding.
1 provisions across 1 enactments
Surinder Arjun
State of Punjab
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
