The Hindu : New Delhi News : High Court rejects bail application

Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Wednesday, Dec 23, 2009
ePaper | Mobile/PDA Version

New Delhi

New Delhi

High Court rejects bail application

Staff Reporter

Petitioner charged with defrauding the Punjab National Bank of about 1.5 crore

NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court on Tuesday rejected the bail application of an accused charged, along with nine others, with defrauding the Punjab National Bank here of about 1.5 crore.

Rejecting the bail application of Mukesh Jain, Justice V. K. Jain said: “I am of the considered view that the petitioner should not be enlarged on bail.”

The Central Bureau of Investigation’s allegations against the accused are that two cheques for Rs.55.06 lakh and Rs.51.65 lakh purportedly issued by Messrs Sahara India Finance Corporation Ltd. were deposited in the account of Messrs Bahubali Marketing Pvt. Ltd. in which the accused and his wife, Benu Jain, were directors.

The investigating agency alleged that these cheques were forged after procuring a multi-city use cheque book from the Darya Ganj branch of the bank and printing the name of Lal Bagh branch of the bank in Lucknow.

The agency further alleged that of the total amount of the two cheques, the accused and his wife had withdrawn Rs.38 lakh through self cheques and Rs.60.61 lakh was transferred to the account of Messrs Analytical Impex Ltd.

Pramod Kumar Pandey of Analytical Impex Ltd. had withdrawn Rs.50 lakh in cash from the company’s account and handed it over to Mukesh Jain in the presence of S. K. Bhargav, another accused in the case, and another Rs.10 lakh was transferred to the account of Messrs Saint Grandeur, owned allegedly by a relative of the accused, the agency stated.

Public money

Rejecting the bail application, Justice Jain said: “It is true that the petitioner has been in custody for more than eight months and the charge-sheet has been filed but considering the huge amount of public money being retained by him, his having been in custody for eight months by itself would not, in the facts and circumstances of this case, entitled him to grant of bail at this stage.”

Printer friendly page
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

New Delhi