5 Sep 2019 1:37 AM GMT
The Supreme Court has issued notice on a special leave petition filed against a Bombay High Court order that declined the prayer of a victim of a crime to allow the withdrawal of amount deposited by the accused as condition for securing pre-arrest bail.The bench of Justices Indu Malhotra and Subhash Reddy issued the notice on September 2.The petition arises out of a cheating case filed by...
The Supreme Court has issued notice on a special leave petition filed against a Bombay High Court order that declined the prayer of a victim of a crime to allow the withdrawal of amount deposited by the accused as condition for securing pre-arrest bail.
The bench of Justices Indu Malhotra and Subhash Reddy issued the notice on September 2.
The petition arises out of a cheating case filed by a Mumbai-based gynecologist Amul Navnitlal Rawal alleging that he was duped by the false promises of a builder. Rawal alleged that the builder had diverted an amount of Rs.10,83,000 out of several lakhs of money deposited by him for construction of apartments.
Based on Rawal's complaint, an FIR for the offence of cheating and criminal breach of trust under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal Code was registered in 2016.
The Bombay High Court granted anticipatory bail to the accused in the criminal case on the condition that he should deposit the amount of Rs.10,83,000 in a nationalized bank. This was after the counsel for the accused admitted before the Court that he had withdrawn this amount. The accused deposited the amount and secured pre-arrest bail.
In this backdrop, Rawal, the complainant, filed an application under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, seeking to withdraw the amount deposited by the accused. Rawal stated that the amount lawfully belonged to him, and he, being the victim of the crime, was entitled to it. He also pointed out that he was a senior citizen and that the trial of the case might take years to complete.
If the police had seized the account of the accused under Section 102 CrPC, the victims can seek withdrawal of money from it by invoking Section 457 of CrPC after filling of chargesheet in view of the judgment of Supreme Court Teesta Atul Setalvad V State of Gujarat AIR 2018 SC 27; however, that option is not given for amounts voluntarily deposited by an accused, the SLP states. This discrimination, according to the petitioner, is unjust, as the complainant is made to wait til the completion of trial to get the money cheated out of him, which may take several years.
The petition has also cited the decision of SC in Rakesh Baban Barhode vs State of Maharashtra (2015) 2 SCC 313, where the Court had allowed the complainant in that case to withdraw the amount deposited by the accused as condition for bail, subject to the result of the case.
"It is submitted that the Hon'ble High Court has failed to consider that the amount deposited with the Registry rightly belongs to the petitioner and the denial of the same would amount to injustice to the victim who has been cheated and made to suffer at the hands of the builder", stated the petition drafted by Advocate Nilesh Tribhuvan and filed through Advocate Anand Landge.
Click here to download the petition