TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 11X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... RASIMHULU AND ORS. VERSUS PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF ANDHRA PRADESH [ 1977 (12) TMI 143 - SUPREME COURT ], Supreme Court held that the delicate light of the law favors release unless countered by the negative criteria necessitating that course. In PRAHLAD SINGH BHATI VERSUS N.C.T., DELHI AND ANR. [ 2001 (3) TMI 1053 - SUPREME COURT ], Supreme Court highlighted one of the factors for bail to be the public or the State's immense interest and similar other considerations. In DATARAM SINGH VERSUS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH AND ANR. [ 2018 (2) TMI 410 - SUPREME COURT ], Supreme Court held that the grant or refusal of bail is entirely within the discretion of the judge hearing the matter and though that discretion is unfettered, it must be exercised judiciously, compassionately, and in a humane manner. If the petitioner finds bond amount beyond social and financial reach, it may be brought to the notice of this Court for appropriate reduction. Further, if the petitioner finds bail condition(s) as violating fundamental, human, or other rights, or causing difficulty due to any situation, then for modification of such term(s), the petitioner may file a reasoned applica ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... City Phagwara, District Kapurthala 420, 467, 468, 471 120-B IPC 3. In Maulana Mohd Amir Rashadi v. State of U.P., (2012) 3 SCC 382, Hon ble Supreme Court holds, [10] It is not in dispute and highlighted that the second respondent is a sitting Member of Parliament facing several criminal cases. It is also not in dispute that most of the cases ended in acquittal for want of proper witnesses or pending trial. As observed by the High Court, merely on the basis of criminal antecedents, the claim of the second respondent cannot be rejected. In other words, it is the duty of the Court to find out the role of the accused in the case in which he has been charged and other circumstances such as possibility of fleeing away from the jurisdiction of the Court etc. 4. In Paramjeet Singh v. State of Punjab, CRM-M 50243 of 2021, this court observed, While considering each bail petition of the accused with a criminal history, it throws an onerous responsibility upon the Courts to act judiciously with reasonableness because arbitrariness is the antithesis of law. The criminal history must be of cases where the accused was convicted, including the sus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s is thirty lakh rupees or more; or (iii) the offences specified under Part C of the Schedule, enquiries were initiated under PMLA against the accused persons after recording brief facts of scheduled offences in ECIR po. ECIR/03/JLZO/2017 dated 07.11.2017. A brief summary of the investigation culminating in the filing of this Prosecution Complaint is as follows: (2.1). Sh.Vikram Seth had operated bogus entities viz. M/s B.L. Seth Steels Ltd., M/s B.L. Seth Coal Sales Pvt. Ltd., M/s V. S. Traders, M/s V. S. Enterprises, M/s P. K. Enterprises, M/s Goel Sales Corporation, M/s Subhash Singh Co., M/s Unique Traders, M/s Quality Lime Product, M/s R. Sales Pvt. Ltd., M/s U.R. Enterprises and M/s M. K. Traders in the name of himself and his family members viz. Suresh Seth (his brother), 129 Sunita Seth (his wife), Anita Seth (his sister-in-law), Shivam Seth (his son), Veena Handa (his sister), Anand Prakash Handa (his brother-in law), Meenakshi Handa (his niece). (2.2). Sh. Vikram Seth had availed 19 loans from Bank of Baroda, G.T. Road, Phagwara, fraudulently through criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery and using forged documents as genuine in the names of business entities open ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amount of funds have been siphoned off by Sh. Vikram Seth and others in the form of cash withdrawals as explained in para 7.4 of this complaint. As elaborated in the money trail, some cash withdrawals were found to be utilized for purchasing immovable properties. (2.7). Further, a large amount of loan funds/ cash withdrawn from fraudulent loan accounts of Bank of Baroda were diverted by Sh. Vikram Seth for making repayment of those old loans which were earlier availed by the BL Seth group from other banks/financial institutions as elaborated in detail in para 7.7 of this complaint. (2.8). Apart from the above mentioned 19 loans, in separate cases bearing F.I.R. No. 61/2013 dated 13.05.2013 and F.I.R. No. 86/2013 dated 30.07.2013, Sh. Vikram Seth along with others opened accounts of fake firms, created forged and fabricated mortgage through criminal conspiracy, cheating, forgery of valuable security for the purpose of cheating and by using forged documents as genuine thereby causing a wrongful loss of Rs.89.5 Lacs and Rs. 2.7 Crores respectively to the Bank of Baroda, Phagwara and wrongful gain to the accused persons. (2.9). In para 7.6, 7.7 and 8 of this complaint, it is c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of crime, as defined in the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002, so generated, some funds are directly or indirectly parked in immovable and movable assets in his name/ in the name of his business concerns and in the name of his family members as elaborated in Para 7.6 of this complaint V. A large amount of funds have been siphoned off through the accounts in his name/ in the name of his business concerns in the form of cash withdrawals as explained in para 7.4 of this complaint. As elaborated in the money trail, some cash withdrawals were found to be utilized for purchasing immovable properties. VI. Further, a large amount of loan funds/ cash withdrawn from fraudulent loan accounts of Bank of Baroda were diverted for making repayment of those old loans which were earlier availed by the BL Seth group from other banks/financial institutions as elaborated in detail in para 7.7 of this complaint and he has actively participated in diversion of funds. VII. It is clear that Sh. Shivam Seth who has acquired, is in possession and project/claim title of proceeds of crime in his name and in the name of business concerns in his name, as untainted property, is actually involved ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... espite the existence of a prima facie case, the Court records reasons for its satisfaction for the need to release such person on bail, in the given fact situations. The rejection of bail does not preclude filing a subsequent application. The courts can release on bail, provided the circumstances then prevailing requires, and a change in the fact situation. In State of Rajasthan v Balchand, AIR 1977 SC 2447, (Para 2 3), Supreme Court noticeably illustrated that the basic rule might perhaps be tersely put as bail, not jail, except where there are circumstances suggestive of fleeing from justice or thwarting the course of justice or creating other troubles in the shape of repeating offences or intimidating witnesses and the like by the petitioner who seeks enlargement on bail from the Court. It is true that the gravity of the offence involved is likely to induce the petitioner to avoid the course of justice and must weigh when considering the question of jail. So also, the heinousness of the crime. In Gudikanti Narasimhulu v Public Prosecutor, (1978) 1 SCC 240, (Para 16), Supreme Court held that the delicate light of the law favors release unless countered by the negative criteria ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ould also have a further option to switch between the modes. The option lies with the accused to choose between the sureties and deposits and not with the Court or the arresting officer. 15. Given above, provided the petitioner is not required in any other case, the petitioner shall be released on bail in the case captioned above, in the following terms : (a). Petitioner to furnish personal bond of Rs. Ten thousand (INR 10,000/-); AND (b) To give one surety of Rs. Twenty-five thousand (INR 25,000/-), to the satisfaction of the concerned court, and in case of non-availability, any nearest Ilaqa Magistrate/duty Magistrate. Before accepting the surety, the concerned court must satisfy that if the accused fails to appear in court, then such surety can produce the accused before the court. OR (b) Petitioner to hand over to the concerned court a fixed deposit for Rs. Ten Thousand only (INR 10,000/-), with the clause of automatic renewal of the principal and the interest reverting to the linked account, made in favor of the Chief Judicial Magistrate of the concerned district. Said fixed deposit may be made from any of the banks where the stake of the State is more than 5 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities. Otherwise, the bail bonds shall remain in force throughout the trial and after that in Section 437-A of the Cr.P.C., if not canceled due to non-appearance or breach of conditions. 18. The conditions mentioned above imposed by this Court are to endeavour that the accused does not repeat the offence and to provide an opportunity to the victim to consider legal remedies for recovery of the amount. In Mohammed Zubair v. State of NCT of Delhi, Writ Petition (Criminal) No 279 of 2022, Para 29, decided on July 20, 2022, A Three-Judge bench of Hon ble Supreme Court holds that The bail conditions imposed by the Court must not only have a nexus to the purpose that they seek to serve but must also be proportional to the purpose of imposing them. The courts while imposing bail conditions must balance the liberty of the accused and the necessity of a fair trial. While doing so, conditions that would result in the deprivation of rights and liberties must be eschewed. 19. Any Advocate for the petitioner and the Officer in whose presence the petitioner puts signatures on personal bonds shall explain all conditions of this bail order in any language that the petitioner understands. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
