Probe relief to accused denied bail by courts: High Court

Saurabh Malik

Chandigarh, February 4

In an out-of-the-ordinary order, Justice Deepak Sibal of the Punjab and Haryana High Court today ordered the UT Director-General of Police to hold a fact-finding inquiry into a case where a Superintendent of Police virtually granted anticipatory bail to an accused after it was concurrently denied by the UT Sessions Court, the High Court and the Supreme Court on the grounds that his custodial interrogation was necessary.

In the status report filed by the UT before Justice Sibal on a previous date of hearing, it was stated that Anup Nargas and Sanjeev Bhatia had lured the complainant in the case to invest Rs50 lakh in a company floated by them. Such allurement was made by showing the company’s forged share valuation certificate. The report added that both Nargas and Bhatia embezzled the amount after the complainant invested Rs50 lakh.

Justice Sibal observed that Nargas’ anticipatory bail before the UT Sessions Court was opposed by the prosecution, saying that he had played a vital role in forging the company’s share valuation certificate. It was added that he, along with Bhatia, defrauded several persons, including the complainant. As on date, they had embezzled over Rs344 lakh.

Dismissing the plea vide an order, dated November 13, 2020, the Sessions Court expressed the opinion that Nargas’ custodial interrogation was necessary. The High Court, too, was of the opinion that Nargas’ custodial interrogation was required and rejected his plea through an order, dated December 22, 2020. The Supreme Court, too, on December 30, 2020, dismissed his special leave petition with a further direction to surrender within two weeks and apply for regular bail.

Justice Sibal added that the Sessions Court, High Court and the Supreme Court were concurrently of the view that Nargas’ custodial interrogation was necessary. Instead of surrendering after the dismissal of his SLP, Nargas made a representation to the then Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, reiterating the stand he had taken before the three courts.

The SP made a noting on the representation directing a Deputy Superintendent of Police to look into the matter with a further direction to the investigating officer to join Nargas in the investigation. As a result of such a noting in a non-bailable offence, the SP virtually granted anticipatory bail to Nargas concurrently denied to him by the three courts.

As a result of the noting, the police has not arrested Nargas for more than a year, while similarly placed co-accused were in custody and their regular bail was being vehemently opposed by the state.

In pursuance to the previous order, UT DGP Praveer Ranjan appeared before the court through videoconferencing and acknowledged that the issue was serious.

“The DGP, UT, is directed to hold a preliminary fact-finding inquiry into the circumstances with regard to the making of the noting, dated January 4, 2021, by the Superintendent of Police, Economic Offences Wing, UT, on Nargas’ representation as also to go into the discriminatory consequences which flowed from such noting for over a year,” Justice Sibal ordered.