LAWS(HPH)-2019-1-56

SAURABH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

Decided On January 07, 2019
SAURABH Appellant
V/S
STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This petition has been filed for regular bail under Sec. 439 Crimial P.C. in case FIR No. 167 of 2018, dated 20.7.2018 under Sections 379, 420, 467, 468 and 471 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC'), registered at Police Station, Baddi, District Solan, H.P.

(2.) Status report stands filed. Record has also been produced.

(3.) Petitioner is in custody since 26.10.2018. As per record produced and status report filed, facts of the case, as per investigation is that one Chintu had caused transfer of an amount of Rs.12,10,151.00 on 7.7.2018 in the account of one Mohit, who after withdrawal of Rs.7,10,000.00 on 9.7.2018 had handed over Rs.7,10,150.00 to Dheeraj and had told that remaining amount of Rs.5,00,000.00 he would be transferring through cheque or bank account and had asked for account number of person in whose account the remaining amount was to be transferred. As per investigation, it has been revealed by the petitioner that Dheeraj had handed over the said amount to Chintu, who in turn had given Rs.50,000.00 to Dheeraj. When Dheeraj had objected on the ground that 10% amount was agreed to be paid to him, Chintu on intervention of persons known to him, present on the spot, had handed over Rs.50,000.00 to Dheeraj and out of that Dheeraj had handed over Rs.50,000.00 to Saurav. According to prosecution, it has further been revealed by the petitioner that his account number was given to Mohit and on 11.7.2018 Mohit had transferred Rs.5,00,000.00 in the his account and said amount after withdrawal was handed over by him to Chintu, who in turn had given to him Rs.5,000.00 and after arrest of the petitioner, Rs.2600.00 has also been recovered from his bed box, whereas he has stated that remaining amount has been spent by him visiting here and there. Chintu, Dheeraj and Rahul Yadav are stated to be absconding. So far as Mohit is concerned, for reasons that at this stage no incriminatory evidence against him has been found, he has not been considered to be an accused.