IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 931 of 2011. Date of decision: 24.11.2011. Kewal Krishan …..Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Anup Rattan, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. J.S.Rana, Asstt. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (Oral). This is an application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C. for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No. 144 of 2011 dated 17.9.2011, registered at Police Station, Dehra, District Kangra, under sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 34 IPC. 2. It has been stated in the application that petitioner was arrested on 26.9.2011 on the allegations that petitioner has fraudulently withdrawn some amount from bank by producing false cheque. It has been stated that petitioner is running a school for blinds and the cheques were given to the petitioner by one Ranjit Singh as donation for the blind school. The petitioner bonafide Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… accepted the cheques and deposited in his account. The petitioner had no knowledge that cheques were fake. In fact, the petitioner has been trapped by Ranjit Singh Pathania, who was also arrested. The petitioner has been released by Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amb in similar case as one cheque was submitted in Punjab National Bank, Bharwain. The investigation in the case is complete. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 3. The status report has been filed. It has been stated that case has been registered on the basis of written complaint dated 17.9.2011 of Thakur Dass Sharma, Branch Manager, Punjab National Bank, Dehra, stating therein that petitioner has fraudulently withdrawn `14,50,000/- from the bank on the basis of cheque No. 557588 dated 1.8.2011, Punjab National Bank, Sanjay Complex Agra. It has been stated in the status report that petitioner has been arrested on 26.9.2011. 4. The allegations against the petitioner are that he tampered the cheque of `14,50,000/- of Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Agra and deposited in his bank account and withdrawn the amount. He has withdrawn `13,50,000/- and out of this paid `9,00,000/- to Ranjit Singh in cash. In addition, he deposited a cheque of `15,00,000/- in the name of Shiv Hari Andh Vidayalya, Chintpurni of Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Agra and withdrawn some amount. The cases were registered for misappropriating the amounts of both the cheques at Police Station, Dehra and Police Station, Chintpurni. In the case registered at Police …3… Station, Chintpurni, the petitioner is also an accused and the other accused is Ranjit Singh. The court No. 2, Dehra has released Ranjit Singh on bail. Ranjit Singh during investigation has disclosed that he obtained these cheques from one Deepak resident of Merrut and gave these cheques to Kewal Krishan. The prayer has been made for rejection of the bail application. 5. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have also gone through the record. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that petitioner is innocent, he has committed no offence. It has been stated that petitioner is running an institution Shiv Hari Andh Vidayalya, Chintpurni. It has been stated that cheques were given to him by Ranjit Singh, who trapped the petitioner. In the investigation, it has come that Ranjit Singh disclosed that cheques were given to him by one Deepak resident of Merrut. 6. As per investigating agency, the cheques were found to be forged. It has also come in investigation that petitioner had paid `9,00,000/- to Ranjit Singh in cash. It has not been explained for what purpose the petitioner had paid `9,00,000/- to Ranjit Singh after withdrawing the amount of cheque in question. The case is still under investigation, inasmuch as, according to the investigating agency the disclosure made by Ranjit Singh is to be ascertained from Deepak resident of Merrut. It has not been explained for what purpose Dakshinanchal Vidyut Vitran Nigam Ltd., Agra had given the cheque in question to the petitioner or his institution. All these aspects …4… require investigation. Therefore, at this stage, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. Accordingly, the application is dismissed. 7. Any observation made hereinabove shall not be construed as an expression of opinion over the merits of the case. The application stands disposed of. November 24, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.