Punjab & Haryana HC grants bail in Rs 5 crore fraud case, accused barred from transferring his properties

Read Order: Sukhchain Singh v. U.T. Chandigarh 

LE Correspondent

Chandigarh, August 9, 2021: The Punjab and Haryana High Court has granted bail to one of the accused in Rs 5 crore fraud case but subject to the condition that he will furnish a declaration of his immovable properties and also an undertaking that he will not transfer the same without obtaining permission from the Court. 

The bench of Justice Arun Kumar Tyagi, however, said that in case the declaration by the petitioner of his immovable properties is at any time found to be false or he is found to have committed any breach of the undertaking given by him, he will be liable to be proceeded against for contempt of Court and his bail will also be liable to be cancelled. 

The bench passed these directions after it observed that the Court has jurisdiction to award compensation in criminal cases by way of assuming of the powers of Civil Court. 

Under order XXXVIII of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 the Civil Court has the power to call upon the defendant to furnish security for production of property and order attachment of such property before judgment if such security is not furnished, the HC held. 

It said Section 53 of the Transfer of Property Act, 1882 makes every transfer of immovable property made with intent to defeat or delay the creditors of the transferor voidable at the option of any creditor so defeated or delayed. 

“No doubt, in a case where the accused disputes the prosecution version, the question of grant of interim or final compensation by the court will generally arise after taking of cognizance by the Court and not at the stage of consideration of the question of grant of bail to the accused and will also be dependent on interim assessment on the basis of the material on record or final determination of the questions of guilt or innocence of the accused on the basis of evidence produced during trial,” the Bench said.  

It further said that yet even in criminal cases the accused cannot be allowed to fraudulently transfer his properties to defeat or delay the rights of/payment of compensation to the victim.

“Therefore, I am of the considered view that in appropriate cases if the facts and circumstances of the case so warrant even the Criminal Court can, at the time of considering the question of grant of bail to the accused, direct the accused to disclose his moveable and immovable properties/assets and also to submit an undertaking that he will not fraudulently transfer the same in order to defeat any order which may be passed by the Court for restitution/payment of interim/final compensation to the victim of the offence and imposition of any such condition will not fall in the category of ‘impermissible onerous condition,” the bench observed

Details of Case

The petitioner was working as Field Executive in Sector 8-C, Chandigarh Branch of M/s Supreme securities Limited. Co-accused Vipin Kumar Dua, Regional Manager was authorised to operate the bank accounts of the company but all the four accused persons namely Vipin Kumar Dua, RegionalManager; Ankur Moudgill, Assistant Manager; Priya Sharma, Senior Executive (the petitioner) and Sukhchain Singh, Field Executive (the petitioner) were responsible for day to day business of the branch and to maintain the account books in the due course of the business. 

All the above mentioned four accused in collusion and conspiracy with each other and with common intention allegedly embezzled the amount which has been found to be approximately Rs.5.50 crores.