YUSUF KHAN Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) By way of present bail petition filed under S.439 CrPC, prayer has been made on behalf of the petitioner for grant of regular bail in FIR No. 72, dated 3.10.2019, under Ss. 420, 406, 504 and 506 and 120B IPC registered at CID, Police Station, Bharari, Shimla, Himachal Pradesh.

(2.) Status report filed pursuant to order dated 16.6.2020, reveals that the FIR detailed herein above, came to be registered at the behest of the complainant, Rajiv Ranta, who alleged that in the month of September, 2019, persons namely Wasim Ahmed, Yusuf Pathan(petitioner) and Salim Mohamad purchased 11 trucks of apple boxes (8381 boxes) for total consideration of Rs. 1,11,4,062/-, but till date only a sum of Rs. 61,00,000/- has been remitted in his saving bank account. He alleged that despite repeated requests, all the three persons named herein above are not making balance payment, as such, appropriate action in accordance with be taken against them.

(3.) On 6.3.2020, Police apprehended present bail petitioner from Malegaon, District Nasik, Maharashtra and since then, he is behind the bars. On 16.6.2020, learned counsel for the petitioner, while inviting attention of this Court to annexures P-1 and P-2 i.e. agreement and receipt allegedly executed by the complainant contended that the entire payment falling to the share of the bail petitioner stands remitted into the saving bank account of the complainant, as such, no case, if any, is made out against the bail petitioner. This Court, with a view to ascertain the genuineness and correctness of the aforesaid documents placed on record, directed learned Additional Advocate General to have instructions. Learned Additional Advocate General states that as per instructions imparted to him telephonically by Investigating Officer, both the documents are genuine and same have been executed by complainant, Rajiv Ranta. Learned Additional Advocate General fairly states that in terms of the aforesaid affidavit as well as receipt, nothing at this stage is due from the bail petitioner, as such, he can be ordered to be enlarged on bail, subject to the condition that he shall make himself available for investigation and trial, as and when called for by the investigating agency.