TMI Blog2020 (3) TMI 983X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the petitioners on stringent condition in order to ward off any apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioners may flee from justice. The petitioners are directed to be released on regular bail on their furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. - CRM-M No.38943 of 2019(O&M) - - - Dated:- 4-2-2020 - Mr. Justice Raj Mohan Singh For the Petitioners : Mr. Akashdeep Singh, Advocate For the Complainant : Mr. J.S. Ghumman, DAG, Punjab., Mr. Simranjit Singh, Advocate ORDER RAJ MOHAN SINGH, J. [1]. Prayer is for grant of regular bail in case bearing FIR No.240 dated 21.09.2015 registered under Sections 420, 465, 468, 471, 120-B IPC at Police Station City Kapurthala, District ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oney. 4. That after 2 days I went with ₹ 2 lacs to house of accused No.1 where accused No.3, 4, 5, 6 and 9 were present. That on the guarantee of accused No.1, 3, 4 and 9, I handed over the money to accused No.1 and 2 who after counting handed over the same to accused No.5 and 6. Accused No.5 and 6 also told me that if you invest more money within 1-2 months, then the time period will be considered as the same of the 1st investment. 5. That in start of March, 2013 I called up Hardeep Kaur and stated that I want to invest more money. Therefore, she sent accused No.1, Hemant and accused No.4 Priya to my residence and I handed over ₹ 3 lacs to them. That after 3 days I again went to boutique of Hardeep Kaur and told ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n whom I can recognized if brought before me. [3]. Petitioner No.2 along with co-accused Hardeep Kaur had given an affidavit to the complainant on 10.10.2013 in the context of money transactions. In the context of complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, proceedings are pending, where accused therein are appearing after grant of bail. Para Nos.1 and 2 of the affidavit are reproduced hereasunder:- 1. That we required some money for our personal needs therefore we have taken ₹ 12 lacs cash from Sushma Anand w/o Naresh Kumar Anand, r/o H. No.31/68, Mohalla Khanjanchiyan, Kapurthala. In lieu of the amount we have given a cheque No.541996 dated 28.02.2014 amounting to ₹ 12 lacs from our joint account N ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... roda, Branch Kapurthala and an amount of ₹ 1,46,000/- was arranged from her house, an amount of ₹ 3,00,000/- from her daughter Rubby Sachdeva and daughter Shikha Lumba who had come from USA and Australia respectively. The aforesaid source was not pleaded in the original version. Similarly, an amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- sought to be invested by the complainant was also not pleaded in the FIR for which she has deposed that in the first week of 2013, she again asked Hardeep Kaur for further investment of the aforesaid amount of ₹ 5,00,000/- and she called Rashmi Singh and Inderjeet Singh and both came to her house on 10.03.2013. The complainant further gave new addition in the context of date dated 21.03.2013 and in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ischarged from jail hospital on 21.09.2019. He was referred to Civil Hospital, Kapurthala on 23.09.2019 with chief complaint of seizures and old case of CVA. He was checked and was given medication. He was advised CT scan Head either from GMC Amritsar or from Civil Hospital, Jalandhar. Hence he was referred to Civil Hospital Jalandhar on 27.09.2019 for CT scan head. He was given date of 28.09.2019 for CT scanning of head at Civil Hospital Jalandhar. His CT scan head was done on 28.09.2019. His CT scan gave the impression of age related cerebral atrophic changes. CVA is a stroke in the brain. CT Scan of petitioner No.1 gave impression of age related cerebral atrophic changes. Petitioner No.1 on account of such stroke remained confine ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... uation, bail can be granted to the petitioners on stringent condition in order to ward off any apprehension of the prosecution that the petitioners may flee from justice. [9]. In Sanjay Chandra Vs. CBI, 2011(4) RCR (Criminal) 898 , the Hon'ble Apex Court has held that when an under-trial is detained in custody to an indefinite period even in an economic offence, it would be violative of Article 21 of the Constitution of India. [10]. At this stage, without forming any opinion on merits of the case, petitioners are directed to be released on regular bail on their furnishing adequate bail/surety bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. Petitioners shall surrender their passports (if any) before the trial Court. [11]. Nothi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
