Dismissed

Shashi Bala and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Punjab & Haryana HC17 Oct 2011CRM-M/13309/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

Petitioners sought pre-arrest bail in a case alleging fraud against a purchaser and a bank. The High Court dismissed the bail plea, holding that the petitioners, a married couple, cheated both the complainant and the bank by selling mortgaged property and not clearing the loan, thus lacking grounds for bail.

What did the court decide?

Petition for pre-arrest bail dismissed; no bail granted.

Shashi Bala and Anr. Vs State of Punjab — Punjab & Haryana HC (2011) — LawSathi Research

¶1

Criminal Misc.-M No. 13309 of 2011

¶2

¶3

IN THE PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT AT CHANDIGARH

¶4

Criminal Misc.-M No. 13309 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: 17.10.2011

¶5

Shashi Bala and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab

..Respondent

CORAM: Hon'ble Mr. Justice Rajesh Bindal

¶11

Present: Mr. Kuldip Sanwal, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. K.S. Pannu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab.

¶12

Mr. Rajiv Joshi, Advocate for the complainant.

¶13

RAJESH BINDAL, J.

¶14

Prayer in the present petition is for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioners. The allegations against the petitioners are that petitioner No.1 had raised a loan of ` 40,00,000/- from the Bank by mortgaging the property owned by her. Part of the property was sold with permission of the Bank. For part of the same power of attorney was executed by petitioner No.1 in favour of petitioner No.2, her husband. He agreed to sell the same to one Pankaj Vashisht on 7.4.2008. Pankaj Vashisht on the strength of agreement to sell executed in his favour, had sold the same to the complainant. As the loan of the Bank had not been cleared, the property in question was attached and proceedings under the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 were initiated. It is only on receipt of notice from the Bank that the complainant came to know about the charge on the property.

¶15

Learned counsel for the petitioners submitted that as per the permission granted by the Bank, petitioner No.1 had sold part of the land and deposited the consideration money with the Bank. For clearing the balance loan amount, she executed power of attorney in favour of petitioner No.2. It is submitted that the land has been sold by the person, in whose favour

¶16

Criminal Misc.-M No. 13309 of 2011

¶17

¶18

petitioner No.2 had executed power of attorney. Sale consideration was also not paid to petitioner No.1 and in fact, she had also been cheated.

¶19

On the other hand, learned counsels for the State as well as complainant submitted that the petitioners in the present case are husband and wife. They in connivance with each other have not only cheated the complainant but also the Bank. Property in question was mortgaged for raising a loan from the Bank but the same was sold. The Bank informed the complainant that a sum of ` 83,34,200/- are due from petitioner No.1. Considering the aforesaid facts, the petitioners are not entitled to pre-arrest bail.

¶20

After hearing learned counsel for the parties and considering the submissions made where the property, which was mortgaged by petitioner No.1 with the Bank to secure the loan, was sold by petitioner No.2, her husband on the basis of power of attorney executed by her in his favour without clearing the loan amount of Bank, in my opinion, the petitioners do not deserve concession of pre-arrest bail.

¶21

Dismissed.

¶22

(RAJESH BINDAL) JUDGE

¶23

17.10.2011 sharmila

Shashi Bala and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Shashi Bala and Anr. v. State of Punjab

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Kaushalpal & Anr. Vs State of Haryana

Sandeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Prem Kumar & Ors. Vs State of Punjab

Gurdeep Singh Vs State of Punjab

Pankaj Vashisht Vs State of Punjab

Sandeep Kumar Vs State of Haryana