SHASHI KANT Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The matter is taken up for hearing through video conference due to COVID-19 situation.

(2.) This is a petition seeking anticipatory bail in FIR No. 142 dated 10.3.2021, under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC (Sections 467, 468 and 471 IPC added later on), registered at Police Station Sampla, District Rohtak.

(3.) The FIR was at the instance of Tasveer son of Banwari Lal. As per the facts stated, the complainant had seen an advertisement of Shree Ram Finance regarding loan and a phone number was mentioned. The complainant contacted on the given phone number enquiring regarding the loan. Petitioner received a call and he was asked to transfer Rs. 60,000/- as loan fee. The amount was deposited in the given account number. The calls were received on 5.3.2021 and 8.3.2021 seeking further deposit of Rs. 1,80,000/- regarding insurance. On 9.3.2021, Rs. 69,000/- were transferred to the account. The complainant was informed that his loan formalities have been completed and the amount would be credited in his account on 10.3.2021. On not receiving the amount, the complainant contacted Shree Ram Finance who stated that all the documents were forged. The phone numbers used were of Amit and Gaurav Vats. During investigation, it transpired that the account in which amounts were deposited was of Gaurav Vats. On further enquiry, it revealed that the documents of Gaurav Vats were used for opening the account but the account never belonged to him. The enquiry proceeded and when mobile numbers and their locations were enquired about, one mobile number allegedly used in the incident was zeroed upon. The CCTV footage from the bank was also recovered. The name of the petitioner surfaced during investigation that he is actively involved.