Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Land Fraudsters Beware: High Court Denies Anticipatory Bail in Rs. 25 Crore Scam Case

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant Judgement, the Delhi High Court, in a judgment delivered on October 17, 2023, denied anticipatory bail to the accused in a case involving allegations of cheating, forgery, and fraud amounting to over Rs. 25 crores. The judgment, delivered by HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE AMIT BANSAL, highlights the gravity of economic offenses and emphasizes the need for thorough custodial investigation in such cases.

The case, FIR No. 71/2022, registered by the Economic Offences Wing, Mandir Marg, New Delhi, pertains to fraudulent activities related to the sale of a Farm House. The complainant alleged that the accused, including the petitioner Trilok Chand Chaudhary, had deceived him into parting with a substantial sum of money for a property they did not own or possess.

Justice Amit Bansal's observations in the judgment underscore the seriousness of the accusations and the need for a detailed investigation:

"Land scams in India have been a persistent issue, involving fraudulent practices and illegal activities related to land acquisition, ownership, and transactions. Scammers often create fake land titles, forge sale deeds, or manipulate land records to show false ownership or an encumbrance-free status... These land scams not only result in financial losses for individuals and investors but also disrupt development projects, erode public trust, and hinder socio-economic progress."

The court also referred to precedents, including the case of Pratibha Manchanda and Anr. v. State of Haryana and Anr. (2023) 8 SCC 181, which emphasized the exceptional circumstances required for anticipatory bail in economic offenses.

The judgment concluded that granting anticipatory bail to the accused would hinder the ongoing investigation, given the serious nature of the offenses and the substantial amount involved. It further noted the applicant's habitual involvement in similar cases and the absence of cooperation in providing necessary documents.

As a result, the interim protection previously granted to the applicant was withdrawn, and the anticipatory bail application was dismissed. The deposited amount of Rs. 2 crores by the applicant remains subject to the outcome of the trial.

This ruling serves as a stern warning to those involved in fraudulent land transactions and underscores the judiciary's commitment to addressing economic offenses with utmost seriousness.

Date of Decision: October 17, 2023

TRILOK CHAND CHAUDHARY  vs STATE

Similar News