Minor in Live-In Relationship Deemed 'Child in Need of Care' by High Court, Protection Ordered Under Juvenile Justice Act Cheque Signed, Sealed, and Bounced – No Escape from Liability: Delhi High Court Right to Defend Includes Right to Inspect Documents: Calcutta High Court Overrules Trial Court's Rejection of Inspection Petition Court Cannot Tinker with Finalized Consolidation Scheme Under Section 42: Punjab and Haryana High Court Remarriage During Appeal Period is Risky, But Not Void: Andhra Pradesh High Court State Cannot Sleep Over Its Rights: Supreme Court Criticizes Odisha Government for Delayed Appeals in Pension Dispute “Both Hands Intact” Rule is a Relic of the Past: Supreme Court Grants MBBS Admission to Disabled Student Terminal Benefits and Family Pension Alone Do Not Bar Compassionate Appointment, But Financial Distress Must Be Proven – Supreme Court Cruelty Under Section 498A IPC Is Not Limited to Dowry Harassment: Supreme Court Right to Speedy Trial Cannot Be Defeated by Delay Tactics: Punjab & Haryana High Court Orders Fast-Tracking of Cheque Bounce Case Framing Charges Under Section 193 IPC Without Following Section 340 CrPC is Illegal: Calcutta High Court Doctrine of Part Performance Under Section 53-A TPA Not Applicable Without Proof of Possession: Andhra Pradesh High Court Mere Allegations of False Implication Cannot Override Strong Forensic and Documentary Evidence: Delhi High Court Upholds Conviction in Elderly Woman’s Murder and Robbery Case Applicant Not a Sexual Predator, Relationship Was Consensual: Bombay High Court Grants Bail in POCSO Case Fraudulent Transfers to Evade Creditors Cannot Escape Scrutiny: Punjab & Haryana High Court Restores Execution Petition Gujarat High Court Rules That Contractual Employees Cannot Claim Regularization of Services Serious Charges and Victim’s Suicide Justify Continued Detention: Gauhati High Court Denies Bail in POCSO Case No Permanent Establishment in India, Rejects Notional Income Taxation: Delhi High Court Rules in Favor of Nokia OY Statutory Bail Under NDPS Act Can Be Denied If FSL Report Reaches Court Before Bail Plea": Calcutta High Court Termination After Acquittal is Unjust: Bombay High Court Quashes Dismissal of Shikshan Sevak, Orders 50% Back Wages Denial of MBBS Seat Due to Administrative Lapses is Unacceptable": Andhra Pradesh High Court Awards ₹7 Lakh Compensation to Wronged Student Sessions Court Cannot Reclassify Non-Bailable Offences While Granting Anticipatory Bail: Allahabad High Court

Anticipatory Bail to Petitioner Alleging Conspiracy and Fraud - Compliance with Loan Procedure: P&H HC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent development, the Punjab and Haryana High Court, presided over by Hon’ble Mr. Justice Avneesh Jhingan, granted anticipatory bail to the petitioner, Paramjit Kohli, who was accused of various offenses under Sections 120-B, 406, 420, 468, and 471 of the Indian Penal Code. The court emphasized the importance of complying with loan procedures and the petitioner’s cooperation with the ongoing investigation.

The petitioner’s plea for anticipatory bail was rooted in the allegations that he was a victim of a larger conspiracy. It was alleged that he had obtained loans against gold jewelry from Bank of India, Sector 16 Branch, Panchkula, and that the bank officials were involved in fraudulent activities. Several similar cases involving other individuals had been registered, leading the petitioner’s counsel to argue that the allegations against the bank officials warranted careful consideration.

Justice Jhingan, in his observations, made it clear that the court’s remarks were not indicative of the case’s merits. He stressed that the petitioner had adhered to the bank’s procedures for availing the loan, and that the jewelry had been verified in the presence of bank officials by the empaneled jeweler. Furthermore, the petitioner had willingly joined the ongoing investigation, making his cooperation evident.

The court concluded by making the interim anticipatory bail granted earlier absolute, subject to the petitioner’s continued compliance with Section 438(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure and his active involvement in the ongoing investigation. The judgment underscored the significance of adhering to procedural norms while highlighting that the observations did not express an opinion on the case’s merits.

The judgment referred to previous cases, including an order dated 27th April 2022 in ‘Vipin Bakshi v. State of Haryana’ and an order dated 10th August 2022 in ‘Sanjana Goyal v. State of Haryana’, both of which were passed by coordinate benches of the court. This further solidified the court’s approach to similar cases.

Date of Decision: 16th August, 2023

Paramjit Kohli vs State of Haryana  

Similar News