Arpit Bajapai vs. State Of Haryana

Facts

The petitioners, Arpit Bajapai and Nishu Rawat alias Neeshu Rawat, sought regular bail in FIR No. 99 dated 24.02.2024, registered under Sections 406, 408, 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the IPC at Police Station Suraj Kund, Faridabad, Haryana. The FIR alleged forgery, cheating, and criminal breach of trust. Specifically, a cheque for Rs. 5,16,000/- intended for GST payment was allegedly misused to prepare a demand draft in favour of M/s GEE FMM Steel Industries India (P) Ltd. Investigations into account books and bank statements indicated a fraud causing a loss of Rs. 4,16,32,752/- between July 2017 and March 2023. The petitioners were arrested on 06.06.2024 and 08.06.2024, respectively. A compromise deed dated 01.07.2024 was executed between the parties.

Held

The Court considered the factual position, acknowledging the grave allegations against the petitioners and co-accused. However, it noted that the matter had been settled between the parties, with the compromise deeds confirmed by the learned counsel for the complainant. The Court also took into account that the petitioners had already joined the investigation and were in judicial custody. Without delving into the merits of the case, the Court allowed the regular bail petitions. The petitioners were ordered to be released on bail upon furnishing bail bonds and surety bonds to the satisfaction of the concerned Magistrate. The ratio decidendi is that a compromise between the parties, even in cases involving serious allegations, can be a ground for granting bail, provided the petitioners have cooperated with the investigation and joined custody.

Key Issues

1. Whether the petitioners are entitled to regular bail in light of the alleged commission of serious offences of cheating and criminal breach of trust involving a substantial amount, as per Sections 406, 408, and 420 of the IPC? Petitioner's contention: The petitioners argued that the matter has been compromised between the parties, evidenced by a compromise deed dated 01.07.2024. They also pointed out that co-accused Raj Kumar and Anchal Rani were granted anticipatory bail by the High Court. They are ready to abide by bail conditions and prayed for bail in view of the compromise. Respondent's contention: The State of Haryana, through its status report, acknowledged the registration of the FIR against the petitioners and co-accused, highlighting specific serious allegations of cheating and breach of trust involving a huge amount. However, it was not disputed that the matter had been settled.