SC grants anticipatory bail to 85% disabled accused in cheating case

NEW DELHI: The Supreme Court has granted anticipatory bail to an accused, who is 85 per cent disabled, in a case pertaining to allegations of cheating and criminal breach of trust.

A bench comprising Krishna Murari and Ahsannuddin Amanullah said: "Without entering into the merits of the contention and having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the petitioner is entitled for anticipatory bail. In such circumstances, it is hereby provided that in case the petitioner is arrested, he shall be released forthwith subject to such conditions which the trial court/investigating agency finds fit to impose"

The allegations against the accused were that he entered into an agreement to sell a piece of land and obtained a sum of Rs 16 lakh in lieu of the same. However, he did not execute the sale deed and sold the property elsewhere.

Advocate Namit Saxena, representing the accused Prem Singh, argued that the FSL report indicates that the signatures of the accused are forged. Saxena further pointed out that the accused is 85 percent permanently disabled and that he is entitled to the benefit of pre-arrest bail.

Rajasthan government counsel vehemently contended that the petitioner is not entitled for any anticipatory bail in as much as he is not cooperating with the investigation and has not appeared before the investigating officer to give his specific signature for being sent for forensic examination.

Saxena said his client is a disabled person and is unable to move freely and thus he could not appear. "It is also pointed out that in the cross FIR the signature of the petitioner was sent for the FSL examination and the report is that the signatures are forged," noted the bench.

The apex court, in its order, said: "It is further provided that the investigating agency shall follow the procedure prescribed under the Code of Criminal Procedure for investigation against the disabled person. It is also directed that the petitioner shall also cooperate with the investigation. With the aforesaid observations and directions, the Special Leave Petition is disposed of. Pending applications, if any, shall stand disposed of."

The Rajasthan High Court had refused to grant the benefit of anticipatory bail to the accused.