Srinagar, Mar 23: A trial court in Srinagar Thursday rejected a bail plea of a Gujarati man, who posed as Additional Director (Strategy & Campaigns) in the Prime Minister’s Office (PMO), New Delhi, while observing that granting bail to accused at this stage would destroy the very fabric of the investigation.
The court rejected a bail plea of Patel Kiran Jagdish Bhai (Kiran Bhai Patel) from Gujarat, who was arrested by the police station Nishat, Srinagar earlier this month for masquerading as Additional Director at PMOs office and for allegedly resorting to cheating, forgery and impersonation to dupe gullible people by promising them government jobs.
The court of Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) Raja Mohammad Tasleem said that surprisingly the offence committed by the accused has not to be taken lightly and a thorough investigation is required to be conducted as to what could be the other possible connection of the accused which can be checked, scanned and controlled at the initial stage, so that an “ugly situation” is not again erupted.
Taking a note of the police report, the court observed that the accused has prima facie forged and manufactured some documents including some visiting cards on the basis of which he has defrauded not only a single or group of person but extremely elevated class of the society, including high officials of the civil administration and police authorities and at the end of the day has succeeded in getting Z Category Security, bullet proof vehicle and has enjoyed five star protocol brazenly for a considerable period of time.
CJM noted that the accused has visited most, sensitive locations and areas of Kashmir which are highly protected and extremely sensitive as far as present security scenario of Kashmir is concerned, “hence this aspect of the matter has necessarily to be shifted out thoroughly by the investigating machinery as to how and with what motive and object the accused has visited these locations and areas.”
Judge Tasleem underscored that during this whole period some more persons have remained closely connected with the accused person whose nexus with the accused person requires proper investigation.
“As far as sophisticated and well planned criminal activities of the accused are concerned a well knit network of the accused around cannot be ruled out in terms of investigation so far conducted,” the court said.
Adding that, resultantly there is every reasonable apprehension that in case the accused is released on bail, he shall try to contact prosecution witnesses and shall definitely try to win over prosecution witnesses and shall also destroy the evidence which has not been collected by the investigating agency so far.
The court ruled that the accused cannot claim bail as a matter of right because he has applied for bail in terms of Section 437 Cr.P.C, clause (i) which reads that such person shall not be so released if there appear reasonable grounds for believing that he has been guilty of an offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life.
The Assistant Public Prosecutor (APP), Mohsin Khan argued that at this stage when the tip of iceberg vis-a-viz the crime under investigation has only surfaced, the grant of bail to the accused is beyond stretch of investigation besides it would be a huge blow to the fair investigation.
He submitted that there are already several FIRs under like provisions of law registered against the accused in his native place which depicts his being the highest nature of “Conman and Thug.”
On the other hand, the counsel representing the accused person while relying on various judgments submitted that he is a law abiding person and deeply rooted in the society hence shall not flee from the clutches of justice in case the discretion of bail is exercised in his favour and shall also cooperate with the investigating agency.
“On the other hand I respectfully disagree with the submission put forth by Ld. Counsel for the applicant because in case at this stage discretion of bail is exercised in favour of the accused it shall definitely destroy the very fabric of the investigation,” Judge said.
Declining to grant bail, the court said the application is devoid of any merit which deserves to be rejected
