Facts of the Case

The petitioner, Mohit Kumar, filed a second petition seeking regular bail under Section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in connection with FIR No. 128 dated 07.07.2021, registered at Police Station Sector-53, Gurugram, Haryana, for offences punishable under Sections 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

The complainant alleged that he received calls from persons claiming to be employees of an insurance-related organization associated with IRDAI. They induced him to deposit substantial amounts on the pretext of releasing an insurance refund of ₹22,80,000. The complainant successively deposited various sums towards removal of insurance agent codes, opening an insurance demat account, GST charges, and execution of release documents. Ultimately, he paid approximately ₹24,50,020 within a week and was again asked to deposit further amounts, following which he realized that he had been cheated and lodged the FIR. During investigation, offences under Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC were added and the police filed the final report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C.

 Issues Involved

  1. Whether the petitioner was entitled to regular bail under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
  2. Whether the compromise between the complainant and the accused could be considered while deciding the bail application.
  3. Whether continued custody was justified after completion of investigation and filing of the challan.

 Petitioner’s Arguments

The petitioner contended that:

  • He was not named in the original FIR, which was primarily registered against Varun Saxena and Manish Sharma.
  • An amount of ₹14,70,000 had already been recovered from the bank accounts of the named accused.
  • The parties had entered into a compromise dated 30.01.2022, and the complainant had no objection to the grant of regular bail.
  • He had remained in judicial custody since 07.07.2021.
  • The investigation had been completed and the challan had already been presented before the trial Court.
  • He was not involved in any other criminal case and had clean antecedents.

 Respondent’s Arguments

The State opposed the bail application.

However, the counsel appearing for the complainant acknowledged before the Court that a compromise had been arrived at between the parties and expressly stated that the complainant had no objection if the petitioner was granted regular bail.

 Court Order / Findings

The Punjab and Haryana High Court allowed the petition and granted regular bail to the petitioner after considering the following circumstances:

  • The petitioner had remained in custody since 07.07.2021.
  • The investigation had been completed and the challan had already been filed, while charges were yet to be framed.
  • The petitioner was not involved in any other criminal case and had clean antecedents.
  • The offences were triable by a Magistrate.
  • A compromise had been effected between the complainant and the accused, and the complainant had no objection to grant of bail.

Accordingly, the Court directed that the petitioner be released on regular bail upon furnishing the requisite bail and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate.

 Important Clarification

  • Grant of regular bail does not amount to acquittal or determination of innocence.
  • The Court considered the completion of investigation, length of custody, clean antecedents, magisterial nature of the trial, and the compromise between the parties while exercising its discretionary power under Section 439 Cr.P.C.
  • The observations made in the bail order are confined to deciding the bail application and do not prejudice the merits of the criminal trial.

 Statutory Provisions Involved

  • Section 439, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Special powers of High Court and Court of Session regarding bail.
  • Section 173(2), Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Filing of police report (challan).
  • Section 419, Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Cheating by personation.
  • Section 420, Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Cheating and dishonestly inducing delivery of property.
  • Section 467, Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Forgery of valuable security, will, etc.
  • Section 468, Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Forgery for the purpose of cheating.
  • Section 471, Indian Penal Code, 1860 – Using forged document as genuine.

Link to download the order-https://mytaxexpert.co.in/uploads/1783921314_4004compressed.pdf

 Disclaimer

This content is shared strictly for general information and knowledge purposes only. Readers should independently verify the information from reliable sources. It is not intended to provide legal, professional, or advisory guidance. The author and the organisation disclaim all liability arising from the use of this content. The material has been prepared with the assistance of AI tools.