VANSH BAHADUR SINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) In this case, the learned Additional Sessions Judge declined the anticipatory bail application to the petitioner, on the ground that the petitioner Company is involved in cheating to the tune of rupees two to four crores of rupees. Hundreds of small investors who had deposited their life time savings were defrauded. The learned Additional Sessions Judge correctly mentioned that the petitioner is the Managing Director and his wife and sons are the Directors of the Company. The Company is more like a family owned concern. 500 to 600 cheques have already been dishonoured because no amount is lying in the Bank accounts of the Company. On these considerations, the anticipatory bail was dismissed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge.

(2.) On 4th May, 1998, Mr. Rajiv Nayar, learned Senior Advocate appearing for the petitioner had stated before this Court, on instructions, that the petitioner had no intention of cheating any of the investors and even now he is willing to pay the entire amount due and payable to them. Mr. Nayar submitted that the petitioner in order to demonstrate his bonafides and genuine desire to pay the outstanding amount to the small investors is prepared to deposit Rs. one crore with the Registrar of this Court provided tie is given interim protection from arrest and two weeks' time to pay the amount. Mr. Nayar further submitted that even the remaining outstanding amount shall also be paid to all the investors within a reasonable time. The Court was given a clear impression that the entire out standing amount of all the investors shall bepaid very shortly. It was assumed that the poor investors' primary interest was to get their outstanding amount and not to send the petitioner to the jail.

(3.) Mr. Nayar also assured the Court that the petitioner shall join the investigation and would fully co-operate with the respondents.