JUDGMENT
Vinod K. Sharma, J.
1. This Criminal Misc. under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has been moved for the grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 51 dated 6.2.2007 under Sections 406/420 the Indian Penal Code registered at Police Station Ambala City.
2. The allegations made in the FIR read as under:
To the SSP Ambala City Haryana, Sub power of attorney to run vehicles. Sir, I am a defence person and retired from Air Force as a Master Warrant Officer (2) I had three Oil Tankers. Two on my name and one at the name of N.R.Paramjeet Singh Gill vide Registration No. HR 37-B, 150, HR-37-B-1100 and HR-37-B, 1601. These vehicle were financed by Ashok Layland attached to Aggarwal Road Line (Sh.Makhan Lal) Sadul Shehar Distt. Ganga Nagar to work with Reliance company at Rewari Haryana on 27th July 2005. The contract of Aggarwal Road line was black listed and our above three vehicles were also ceased to work with the Company. I waited for three months that the company will start functioning but it could not get the contract with the Reliance. My vehicles were off road and still I have to pay of Rs. 84,000/-P.M. @ Rs. 20,000/-per vehicle. Now it was very difficult for me to pay the heavy amount of money every month with out any gain from vehicles. Sh.Gaurav Atri of Babyal A/Cantt. was in transport business came to me to run the vehicles on certain terms and conditions. He promised to run the vehicles and pay the monthly installments of vehicles w.e.f. 1st October, 2005 and also transfer the vehicle on his name. Hence, the vehicles were given to him on Powers of Attorney and an agreement was signed by him. Gaurav Atri also issued cheques when I deposited the cheques, the same were bounced and also he did not pay any installment as promised. Now a case has been filed in Distt. Court Mohali and non-bailable warrant has been issued against his name in spite of repeated approach he is not paying any money and neither tells whereabouts of the vehicles. Power of attorney has been cancelled. Gaurav Atri has played fraud with me and holding of vehicles by him is illegal in case of any accident or carrying of any illegal goods in vehicles may harm me as the vehicles are on my sons name.
The Ashoka Layland Company is harvesting me to pay the installment or return the vehicles being an old man, I am in critical condition and have a mental depression.
3. This Court on 12.6.2007 has been pleased to pass the following order:
The Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is not named as an accused in the FIR but is being harassed in view of the disclosure statement of Inderjeet Singh that he sold the scrap of the oil tankers to the petitioner. It is submitted that in the year 2005. Gaurav Attri the main accused approached the petitioner for sale of defunct truck’s chasis in scrap. He showed power of Attorney dated 9.11.2005 (Annexure P.1) in his favour. The petitioner in the normal course of his business purchased the truck’s chasis in scrap for Rs. 1,30,000/-. Gaurav Attri issued due receipt in this regard by way of affidavit dated 8.12.2005 (Annexure P.1). It is submitted that the FIR has now been registered on 6.2.2007 after two years. It is further submitted that the scrap of the oil tankers was initially purchased by Gaurav Attri, who is the main accused in the case and who had embezzled the oil tankers. It is further submitted that the petitioner in the circumstances is not in any way involved in the embezzlement. Notice of motion for 6.9.2007.
In the meantime, in the vent of arrest, the petitioner shall be admitted to interim bail subject to his furnishing personal bond and surety in the like amount to the satisfaction of the Arresting/Investigating Officer. However, he shall join investigation as and when called and shall abide by the conditions of Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.
4. Learned Counsel for the petitioner contends that in pursuance to the order passed byThis Court the petitioner has joined investigation.
5. However, on instruction from ASI Sat Nrain Learned Counsel for the State contends that the petitioner has not cooperated with the investigation as he has not disclosed the whereabouts of the tankers which have been alleged to have been purchased by him.
6. On consideration of the matter I find no case is made out to grant anticipatory bail. During the investigation it has come in evidence that the tankers were make of January 2005 which were handed over to Gaurav Attri for the purposes of plying and the said tankers are alleged to have been sold to the petitioner by Gaurav Attri on the basis of forged power of attorney for a meager consideration in the range of approximately Rs. 1.20 lacs. Thus, the plea of the petitioner that they are bona fide purchasers prima facie cannot be accepted and it is a case where custodial interrogation of the petitioner would be required.
7. No ground for anticipatory bail is made out.
8. Dismissed.