Allowed

Arun Kapoor v. State of Haryana

Punjab & Haryana HC1 Jun 2011CRM-M/7418/2011

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court entertained a Section 439 CrPC bail petition for a petitioner arrested in a cheating case. Declining to comment on merits and noting magisterial trial delays, the court granted bail requiring foreign sureties without local inquiry.

What did the court decide?

Petitioner released on regular bail by furnishing heavy bail bonds with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Magistrate, without insisting for local sureties.

Arun Kapoor Vs State of Haryana — Cheating and Forgery | Punjab & Haryana HC (2011)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

¶2

Crl. Misc. No. M- 7418 of 2011 . [O&M] Date of Decision: 1^st June, 2011 .

¶3

Arun Kapoor

¶4

Petitioner through Mr. Hemant Bassi, Advocate

¶5

Versus

¶6

State of Haryana

¶7

Respondent through Mr. H.S.Doel, Addl.AG, Haryana. Mr. Naresh Sekhawat, Advocate, for the complainant.

¶8

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURYA KANT.

¶9

1. Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2. To be referred to the Reporters or not?

¶10

3. Whether the judgment should be reported in the Digest?

¶11

SURYA KANT, J. [ORAL]

¶12

This petition under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeks the petitioner's release on regular bail in the case FIR No. 66 dated 28.01.2011 registered at Police Station, Civil Lines, Hisar under Sections 420/467/468/471/120-B IPC.

¶13

[2]. M/s Nalwa Steel Udyog, Delhi Road, Hisar filed a Criminal Complaint No. 72-I dated 17.02.2010 before the Judicial Magistrate 1^st Class, Hisar seeking a direction for registration of the above mentioned FIR. The report submitted by the District & Sessions Judge, Hisar pursuant to the order dated 29.04.2011 passed by this Court reveals that the said complaint was adjourned by the Judicial Magistrate on 10.03.2010 for preliminary evidence. One complainant's witness did appear in the preliminary evidence and thereafter the complaint was adjourned at least on six occasions. The said complaint was suddenly withdrawn on 15.09.2010 “in view of the police report” received in that case. Thereafter the same complainant

¶14

filed an identical complaint [Annexure P-5] on 30.10.2010 thorugh the same Advocate, this time, of course, before a different Judicial Magistrate. After adjourning the complaint “for consideration”, learned Judicial Magistrate passed the order dated 22.01.2011 directing the SHO, Police Station, Civil Lines, Hisar “to register the case against the above said accused and to further investigate the matter and submit his report ........”.

¶15

[3]. This is how the subject FIR was got registered against the petitioner and his co-accused, who are settled in South Korea. Suffice it to mention here that as per the allegations, the complainant placed a purchaser order on M/s E N Esteem Company Limited to supply 300 MT of SS Scrap – 304 Grade and when the material was received, it was found to be sub-standard and the petitioner, who was the mediator as well as a co-supplier is alleged to have cheated and defrauded the complainant.

¶16

[4]. The petitioner was arrested on 04.02.2011 and is in judicial custody since then. The investigation is complete and challan has been presented in Court. Meanwhile, the petitioner has filed a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking quashing of the subject FIR in which interim directions have been issued by this Court to adjourn the trial proceedings. In this manner, the trial proceedings, in a way, have been stayed.

¶17

[5]. The petitioner is facing a magisterial trial, the conclusion whereof is likely to take long time. In these circumstances and without expressing any views on the merits of the case, this petition is allowed and the petitioner is directed to be released on regular bail on his furnishing heavy bail bonds with two sureties in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty

¶18

Magistrate, Hisar, who shall not insist for local sureties. However, if so required, genuineness of the title deeds/documents may be got verified.

¶19

[6]. Registry is directed to put up a photo copy of the report dated 07.05.2011 of the District & Sessions Judge, Hisar, this petition, order dated 29.04.2011 passed by this Court as well as other records of this case before the Hon'ble Administrative Judge, Hisar.

¶20

[7]. Disposed of. Dasti .

¶21

June 01, 2011. ( SURYA KANT ) dinesh JUDGE

Arun Kapoor v. State of Haryana

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Arun Kapoor v. State of Haryana

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

Ajit Kumar Vs State of Punjab

Binder Singh Vs State of Punjab & Ors.

Jagroop Singh Vs State of Punjab

Parkash Chand Vs Ut of Chandigarh

Raj Kumari Vs Punjab Public Service Commission & Anr,.

Amritpal Kaur Vs State of Punjab & Ors.