NARESH KUMAR Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The present petition is filed by the petitioner praying inter alia for grant of anticipatory bail under section 438 of the Cr.P.C., in respect of FIR No.511/2007 lodged by the complainant, Mr.Naresh Sabharwal against the petitioner and three others under Section 120B/406/419/420 IPC registered with PS Defence Colony.

(2.) In the order dated 1.11.2010, counsel for the petitioner had stated that the ground for preferring yet another petition seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No.511/2007, after the rejection of his earlier anticipatory bail application is the fact that the learned APP had wrongly made a submission on 18.8.2010 to the effect that the petitioner was involved in four other separate cases. It was submitted on 1.11.2010 by the counsel for the petitioner that on the contrary, the petitioner was not involved in FIRs No.41/2005 and 237/1999 at all. However, the involvement of the petitioner in FIRs No.71/2005 and 342/2004 was not denied. In view of the submissions made on behalf of the petitioner, the learned APP was directed to file a status report giving the current position regarding the aforesaid FIRs, which found mention in para 8 of the rejection order dated 18.8.2010, passed in Bail Application No.1847/2009.

(3.) A verification report is handed over in the court. As per the said report, the petitioner is stated to have been charge-sheeted in FIRs No.71/2005 and 342/2004. It is further stated that the petitioner was named in FIR No.237/1999. However, there is no mention of FIR No.41/2005 in the said report. Learned APP admits that the petitioner is not involved in FIR No.41/2005. It is therefore clear that on 18.8.2010, the statement made on behalf of the prosecution that the petitioner is involved in FIR No.41/2005, was incorrect. Furthermore, as pointed out by the counsel for the petitioner from the reply dated 18.10.2010 issued by the DCP, South Gugraon to the petitioner, on an application filed by him under the RTI Act, while FIR No.41/2005 was filed under Section 451 IPC alone, as per the Status Report dated 6.11.2009, filed in the earlier Bail Application, the offences mentioned were under Sections 406/419/420/467/468/471 IPC. This fact is also not denied by the prosecution.