Research › Search › Judgment

Meghalaya High Court · body

2022 DIGILAW 277 (MEG)

Kishan Gupta v. State of Meghalaya

2022-10-19

W.DIENGDOH

body2022
JUDGMENT 1. Heard Mr. K. C. Gautam, learned counsel for the petitioner who has submitted that the petitioner is a permanent resident of Happy Valley, Shillong in the East Khasi Hills District of Meghalaya and is presently residing at Gurgaon, Haryana where he is employed at White Hat Junior, a private enterprise located at Gurgaon, Haryana. 2. The petitioner is aware of an FIR dated 17.08.2022 filed before the Officer-in-Charge, Crime Branch P.S. (Eastern Range), Shillong which was registered as Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 03(08) 2022 under Section 420/468/471/34 IPC. The petitioner is also aware that two persons have been arrested in connection with the said case. 3. It is also submitted that the petitioner came to know that the police had gone to his residence at Happy Valley where his parents is residing and have enquired about his whereabouts from his parents. In fact, on 23.09.2022 he received a telephonic call from the I/O of the aforementioned case, requiring his appearance before the said I/O in connection with the said case. 4. Therefore, being highly apprehensive that he may be arrested in connection with the said Crime Branch P.S. Case No. 03(08) 2022, the petitioner has accordingly approached this Court with this application for grant of pre-arrest bail under Section 438 Cr.PC. 5. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner is not at all involved in the case as he was only an employee of the firm run by Shri. Pankaj Gupta, one of the persons arrested in connection with the said case and as an accountant of the firm, the computer in which they used to work with was seized by the police for which he was accordingly directed to appear before the I/O. 6. It is also submitted that the two persons who were arrested in connection with the case has since been released on bail. 7. That the petitioner has just joined the firm at Gurgaon therefore if arrested, his reputation and career prospects will be affected and as such, prayer is made for grant of pre-arrest bail. 8. If granted bail, the petitioner undertakes to comply with any conditions to be imposed by this Court and to cooperate with the investigation of the case. 9. Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. 8. If granted bail, the petitioner undertakes to comply with any conditions to be imposed by this Court and to cooperate with the investigation of the case. 9. Mr. S. Sengupta, learned Addl. PP has submitted that the case in question relates to an allegation of forgery of certain documents submitted by M/s Yash Enterprise and M/s G. S. Khyriem who were involved in a tendering process for supply of Group 'A' (Dry Ration) as a result of which the Crime Branch has registered the aforementioned case against them. In course of investigation, it was revealed that the computer from which the alleged forged documents that were printed out was operated by the petitioner herein and investigation is still in process. 10. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is duly noted and the case diary produced before this Court have also been perused. The facts as indicated above would show that the petitioner has admitted that he was working in a firm of one of the persons arrested in connection with the case aforementioned and as such, in all probability he is required to appear before the I/O. However, considering the nature and gravity of the offence alleged, the computer in question having been seized, the custodial questioning of the petitioner may not be necessary. 11. Accordingly, it is the considered opinion of this Court that the petitioner be granted pre-arrest bail. 12. This petition is therefore allowed and the petitioner is directed to be enlarged on bail, in the event of his arrest, if he is not wanted in any other case, on the following conditions. i. That he shall not abscond or tamper with the evidence and witnesses; ii. That he shall appear before the Investigating Officer as and when required; iii. That he shall not to leave the jurisdiction of India without prior permission of the court; and iv. That he shall furnished a personal bond of Rs. 30,000/- (rupees thirty thousand) only with two solvent sureties of like amount to the satisfaction of the concerned court. 13. The Registry to return the case diary. 14. Petition disposed of. No costs.