Criminal Misc. No. M-13378 of 2009 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH **** Criminal Misc. No. M-13378 of 2009 Date of Decision:18.05.2009 Pankaj Srivastav .....Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARBANS LAL Present:- Mr. Gurcharan Dass, Advocate for the petitioner. Mrs. Manjari Nehru Kaul, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. **** JUDGMENT HARBANS LAL, J. This petition has been moved by Pankaj Srivastav under Section 438 of Cr.P.C seeking his anticipatory bail in case FIR No.104 dated 29.7.2008 registered under Sections 408, 465, 468, 471 IPC at Police Station Dera Bassi, District Mohali. This case has been registered at the instance of Professor Jagjit Singh Ghuman, Chairman-cum-Managing Director of M/s APSCO Prefabs Pvt. Ltd., Dera Bassi on the allegations that his company has deposited various amounts against Employees Provident Funds and Employees State Insurance in Government Treasury at State Bank of Patiala, Branch Dera Bassi but the same have not been entered in the cash register of the bank. When they approached the bank, it was informed that an amount of Rs.13,643/- only has been deposited by them vide challan dated 9.6.2004, under Scroll No.49. They have received a letter dated 30.1.2006 from the Criminal Misc. No. M-13378 of 2009 -2- Regional Director, Employees State Insurance Corporation, Chandigarh that the credit of the various amounts deposited by them through State Bank of Patiala, Branch Dera Bassi has not been credited in the account of Employees State Insurance Corporation by the Bank. They apprehend that the amounts deposited by them, have been misappropriated at the Branch Level and the same have not been further remitted to the concerned authorities. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties, besides perusing the record with due care and circumspection. During investigation, it was found that the petitioner had joined the aforesaid company on 19.2.2004. He left his job on 27.4.2005. During his tenure as Cashier, the amounts in question were not deposited in the bank. The bank receipts bearing the stamp of the bank were found to be forged and fabricated. Palpably, there are specific allegations that the petitioner has criminally misappropriated a sum of Rs.1,34,399/- when he was serving as Cashier with the aforesaid Company. This is not a petty amount. Only during interrogation of the petitioner, it can be elicited as to what modus operandi was being adopted by him in criminally misappropriating the respective amounts of the company from time to time. In re: State Represented By the C.B.I v. Anil Sharma, 1997(4) Recent Criminal Reports (Criminal) 268 (SC), it has been held as under:- “We find force in the submission of the CBI that custodial interrogation is qualitatively more elicitation-oriented than questioning a suspect who is well ensconced with a favourable order under Section 438 of the Code. In a case like this effective interrogation of a suspected person is of tremendous Criminal Misc. No. M-13378 of 2009 -3- advantage in disinterring many useful informations and also materials which would have been concealed. Success in such interrogation would elude if the suspected person knows that he is well protected and insulated by a pre-arrest bail order during the time he is interrogated. Very often interrogation in such a condition would reduce to a mere ritual. The argument that the custodial interrogation is fraught with the danger of the person being subjected to third-degree methods need not be countenanced, for, such an argument can be advanced by all accused in all criminal cases. The Court has to presume that responsible police officers would conduct themselves in a responsible manner and that those entrusted with the task of disinterring offences would not conduct themselves as offenders.” To my mind, it is such a case in which the extra-ordinary jurisdiction to admit anticipatory bail to the petitioner cannot be exercised as his custodial interrogation is required. Sequelly, this petition is dismissed. May 18, 2009 ( HARBANS LAL ) renu JUDGE Whether to be referred to the Reporter? Yes/No