LAWS(HPH)-2011-8-276

SMT. GULSHAN BAGGA Vs. STATE OF H.P.

Decided On August 08, 2011
Smt. Gulshan Bagga Appellant
V/S
STATE OF H.P. Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SMT . Gulshan Bagga has filed Cr. MP(M) No. 587 of 2011 and Rahul Bagga has filed Cr. MP(M) No. 588 of 2011 for releasing them on bail under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure in FIR No. 151/11, registered on 23.7.2011 at Police Station, West Shimla under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471 Indian Penal Code. The applicants are mother and son. The Status reports have been filed in both the petitions, record perused. Both the applications are being disposed of by common judgment.

(2.) IT has been stated in the applications that Rakesh Sharma has lodged a false complaint against applicants that model of car number 2001 was wrongly mentioned as 2004 in the RC at the time of purchasing but when he prepared new RC it was found that the manufacturing year of the vehicle is 2001. The applicants have been falsely implicated in FIR No. 151/11 dated 23.7.2011. It has been stated that applicants never made any false representation at the time of sale of the car nor they tampered the RC of the car which was purchased by the applicants in March, 2010.

(3.) THE learned Addl,. Advocate General has opposed the bail applications on the basis of status reports. It has been submitted that case has been registered under Section 156 Code of Criminal Procedure The applicants have joined the investigation. The documents of vehicle No. HP -62 -2001, such as RC, Insurance Policy, agreement to sell have been taken into possession. The dealing assistant of the office of S.T.A. Shimla informed that at the time of feeding data in the computer due to clerical mistake model number 2004 was printed in the R.C. of the aforesaid vehicle instead of model 2001. Smt. Gulshan Bagga had purchased this vehicle from Smt. Neelam Sharma on 8.1.2007 by treating model 2001 of the vehicle. Smt. Gulshan Bagga had sold the vehicle to complainant on 22.3.2010. It has been submitted that applicants have cheated the complainant and committed serious offence. In case the applicants are released on bail, they can terrorize the prosecution witnesses and hamper the investigation. The learned Addl. Advocate General has prayed for dismissal of the bail applications.