Bail Order Saket Court

IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI ,ACMM, SAKET
DISTRICT COURTS,
IN THE MATTER OF :Sh.VINAY KUMAR JAIN
. APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE
Govt.of NCT of Delhi
RESPONDENT
FIR NO.184/2011
PS:EOW
U/S:
406/420/467/468/120B
IPC
APPLICATION UNDER S.482Cr.PC FOR RELEASE OF AMOUNT

DEPOSITED BY THE ACCUSED APPLICANT IN COURT AND TO
COMPLAINANT
THE APPLICANT HEREIN MOST RESPECTFULLY
SHOWETH:
1 That the applicant herein is an accused in the above-captioned case and the
same is pending trial before the Honble Court since
.That in the instant
case an FIR was registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the
Parliament Street police station wherein the applicant herein together with
5other people were named as accused.
2. That pursuant to the registration of the said FIR the accused applicant
herein was arrested and the bail application moved by the accused applicant
was granted
by
Sh.Mukesh kumar LD.ACMM vide order dated
30/10/2012.The operative part of the order is as under:

In view of the submissions made by the counsel for parties and NOC
given by the complainant as well as considering the medical history of
accused, Vinay kumar Jain is admitted on interim bail subject to payment of
Rs17.75lakhs within one week to the complainant and on furnishing of
personal bond in the sum of Rs 1lakhs with one surety of the like amount.
Accused shall also deposit his passport with the IO and to join the
investigation as and when required by the IO. Accused is further directed not
to leave the country without prior permission of the court.
A copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure A
3.Thereafter the acussed applicant approached the Honble Delhi High Court
vide
praying that the above-said order of the LD.ACMM may kindly be
modified and the Honble Court was pleased to modify the said order to the
extent that instead of payment of entire amount of 17.75lakh to the
complainant, he be paid Rs 5lakhs and the rest of 12.75lakhs be deposited in

the court.The operative part of the order is as under:
A copy of the order is annexed as Annexure
4.That in compliance of the order of LD.ACMM dated 30/10/2012 as
modified by the Honble High Court ,the accused applicant paid the amount
of Rs 5Lakh to the complainant vide pay order issued by HDFC Bank
,Green Park and Rs 12.75lakh deposited in the court vide pay order issued
by HDFC Bank,Chandni Chowk.The copy of the pay orders is annexed as
annexure
5.That the applicant accused family in order to comply with the above-said
orders had to take loans and mortgage the valuables to deposit the said
17.75lakhs and the said amount is still lying with the court to the extent of
12.75 lakhs and 5lakhs to the complainant. The applicant is made to pay an
extremely big amount of Rs 40,000/-approx every month by way of interest
on the said loan amount of 17.75lakhs and it is getting increasingly
unmanageable for the applicant.That the applicant and his family has been
financially ruined and are compelled to go through unbearable hardship.
6.That every day the
creditors are knocking his doors demanding the
principal amount and the accruing interest thereon. That since the
registration of the FIR and his arrest, the applicant accused is completely
confined to his house and is not having any income/earning further

worsening the financial conditions.
7.That the other co-accused Mosalpuria was released on surety of only
1lakh as against Rs18lakh of the applicant accused. Other co-accused Jham
was released on furnishing a security of merely 1lakh and since then he is at
liberty and out of India.
That other co-accused Pramod Kumar Gupta was released on the surety of
merely of Rs
That the above-said order is bad and ought to be modified for the reasons
stated as under:
1.That the said order has no jurisprudential basis and has no mandate under
the criminal law.Further the said order is neither supported by any judicial
precedent as such where an accused person has been called upon to pay the
amount allegedly received from the complainant by way of an offence to be
actually paid to the complainant before the accused is convicted.Even if a
person is convicted the Honble Court can punish him for the offence but
cannot order to pay the amount to the other side.This can be ordered only
when a civil proceeding is instituted for the recovery of the amount and
subject to the fulfillment of and not in a criminal proceeding.
2.It is submitted that the above said order is directly in violation of Art 14 of
the Constitution i.e person placed similarly ought to afforded similar
treatment and similar protection under the law.
3.It is submitted that the criminal courts only ask for security as a
precondition for release of an accused in custody,so that he does not run
away or misuses his liberty and in case he violate the same,the security
deposited is forfeited.But in the case at hand the applicant accused has to
deposit the entire amount and is a punishment in itself and thus arbitrary
and unreasonble.
4.That the abovesaid order does not serve the purpose of security as
mandated under the law but penalizes the applicant as if he is actually a
convict. The same purpose may be achieved by directing the accused
applicant to deposit any collateral security to the court and not to the
complainant.
5.That under the abovesaid order the accused applicant alone has to pay Rs
5lakhs to the complainant though there are other accused also.It is submitted
that this is completely illegal and unjustified.It is respectfully submitted that
if the complainant run away with those amounts or become insolvent or
passes away ,the accused applicant will be left high and dry and great
injustice will be perpetuated by the orders of the Honble Court itself.
6.That tomorrow if the applicant is acquitted of which he is 100 percent

sure ,then in that case apart from the rigours of the criminal proceeding he
has to undergo ,he will have no recourse against the huge economic loss
suffered by him and undue enrichment by the complainant.
In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstances,the Honble court may
kindly be pleased to
a)order the release of the entire amount deposited by the accused applicant
as in the case of other co-accused who have been released merely on
personal bond of 1lakh with surety of equal amount or in the alternative
any other collateral security of equivalent value,
b) direct the complainant to return the amount of Rs 5lakh to the accused
complainant herein or in the alternative to deposit it into the court
c) any other relief as the Honble Court may deem fit and proper in the facts
and circumstances of the case.
APPLICANT
THROUGH
PRAMOD KUMAR
IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI,LD.ACMM,SAKET

COUTS,NEW DELHI
IN THE MATTER OF :
Sh.VINAY KUMAR JAIN
. APPLICANT
VERSUS
STATE
Govt.of NCT of Delhi
RESPONDENT
FIR NO.184/2011
PS:EOW
U/S:
406/420/467/468/120B
IPC
APPLICATION UNDER S.482Cr.Pc FOR LEAVE TO SHORT VISIT
OUTSIDE COUNTRY AND RELEASE OF PASSPORT
1. That the applicant herein is an accused in the above-captioned case and
the same is pending trial before the Honble Court .That in the instant case
FIR NO.184/11
was registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the
Parliament Street police station wherein the applicant herein together with
5other people were named as accused.
2.That pursuant to the registration of the said FIR the accused applicant
herein was arrested and the bail application moved by the accused applicant
was granted
by Sh Mukesh kumar LD.ACMM vide order dated
30/10/2012.The operative part of the order is as under:

In view of the submissions made by the counsel for parties and NOC
given by the complainant as will as considering the medical history of
accused,Vinay kumar Jain is admitted on interim bail subject to payment of
Rs17.75lakhs within one week to the complainant and on furnishing of
personal bond in the sum of Rs 1lakhs with one sutety of the like
amount.Accused shall also deposit his passport with the IO and to join the
investigation as and when required by the IO.Accused is further directed not

to leave the country without prior permission of the court.
A copy of the said order is annexed as Annexure A
3.That in compliance of the above-said order of the Ld.ACMM Sh Mukesh

Kumar,the counsel of the accused applicant herein deposited the passport in
the court on the same date itself as is recorded in the order-sheet of the
Honble Court.Acopy of the same is annexed as Annexure B.
4.That since then the passport of the accused applicant is in the custody of
the Honble Court.That the accused who is a very respectable entrepreneur
and has family and social relations outside the country as well ,but the said
order has tied his hand and foot completely and has curtailed his freedom of
movement
5.That since the registration of the FIR he has not been able to visit his
sister and daughter families who are settled outside India even on very vital
family and social functions and occasions and feels depressed and
ostracized.
It is submitted that the accused applicant wants to go to Dubai to

participate in some family and social functions tentatively in the month of
January itself in case permission to the same is granted by the Honble
Court and the release of his passport.
6.That in the present case the charge-sheet has been filed and accused
applicant never ever misused the liberty granted by the Honble Court as is
evident from the records of the case.That the accused applicant always made
himself available for investigation as and when required.
7.It is submitted that the entire case of the prosecution as far as the accused
applicant is concerned ,is premised on a forged payment receipt and the
same has been correctly sent for FSL to determine its veracity.That the
accused applicant is sure that once the said report is finalized and placed
befor the Honble Court,the accused applicant innocence will be established
and in all probabilities is likely to be acquitted.Thus there is no occasion for
the accused to misuse the liberty granted by the Honble Court inviting its
wrath.
8.It is submitted that the accused applicant wants to go to Dubai to

participate in some family and social functions tentatively in the month of
January itself in case permission to the same is granted by the Honble
Court and the release of his passport.
In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstance it is most respectfully

prayed that the Honble Court may kindly be pleased toi)
grant permission to the accused applicant to visit outside India on

terms and conditions determined by the Honble Court ;
ii)
direct the release of the passport of the accused applicant to enable

him to initiate the process for visas etc.
iii)
any other relief as deemed fit in the facts and circumstances of the
case.
APPLICANT
THROUGH
PRAMOD KUMAR

Bail Order Saket Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bail Order Saket Court

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Bail Order Saket Court

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI ,ACMM, SAKET

APPLICATION UNDER S.482Cr.PC FOR RELEASE OF AMOUNT

.That in the instant

case an FIR was registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the

Sh.Mukesh kumar LD.ACMM vide order dated

30/10/2012.The operative part of the order is as under:

praying that the above-said order of the LD.ACMM may kindly be

complainant, he be paid Rs 5lakhs and the rest of 12.75lakhs be deposited in

creditors are knocking his doors demanding the

confined to his house and is not having any income/earning further

6.That tomorrow if the applicant is acquitted of which he is 100 percent

IN THE COURT OF SHRI RAJ KUMAR TRIPATHI,LD.ACMM,SAKET

was registered by the Economic Offences Wing of the

by Sh Mukesh kumar LD.ACMM vide order dated

30/10/2012.The operative part of the order is as under:

investigation as and when required by the IO.Accused is further directed not

3.That in compliance of the above-said order of the Ld.ACMM Sh Mukesh

It is submitted that the accused applicant wants to go to Dubai to

8.It is submitted that the accused applicant wants to go to Dubai to

In the light of the aforesaid facts and circumstance it is most respectfully

grant permission to the accused applicant to visit outside India on

direct the release of the passport of the accused applicant to enable

You might also like