Siphoned Off More Than Rs. 71 Lakhs: Jammu & Kashmir & Ladakh High Court Dismisses Anticipatory Bail Plea in Embezzlement Case
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed the application for offences under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 338 and 316 of the BNSS.
Justice Sanjay Dhar, Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court
The Jammu & Kashmir and Ladakh High Court dismissed an anticipatory bail Application in an embezzlement case, while remarking that the accused had siphoned off more than Rs.71 lakhs.
The Court dismissed the application filed by the Petitioner, who was seeking bail in anticipation of his arrest in connection with an FIR registered under Sections 318(4), 336(3), 340(2), 338 and 316 of the BNSS. The Court remarked, “The offences of this kind where a Manager, taking advantage of the trust reposed upon him by his employer, proceeds to commit breach of such trust, are grave in nature and cannot be taken lightly. The offence alleged to have been committed by the petitioner fall in the category of economic offences.”
A Single Bench of Justice Sanjay Dhar held, “The nature of allegations made against the petitioner is serious as he is alleged to have siphoned off more than Rs.71.00 lacs from the account of the complainant. The Investigating Agency has collected material to support the said allegation. It is alleged in the FIR that the petitioner may have resorted to similar acts of fraud even in previous past and this aspect of the matter is also required to be investigated so as to ascertain the magnitude of the fraud allegedly committed by the petitioner.”
Advocate Aswad R. Attar appeared for the Petitioner, while GA Ilyas Laway and Senior Advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai represented the Respondent.
Brief Facts
The FIR was registered based on a complaint lodged by the proprietor of Lidder Valley Filling Station. She alleged that she had engaged the Petitioner as a Manager of the petrol pump, entrusting him with duties including managing the day-to-day affairs of the petrol pump.
According to the complainant, the Petitioner would send details of sales, expenses, and bank deposits along with supporting bank statements through WhatsApp. However, a reconciliation of accounts at the end of the year revealed some discrepancies.
Court’s Reasoning
The High Court remarked, “In the present case, as already stated, the petitioner is alleged to be involved in a serious case of fraud which has led to embezzlement of more than Rs.71.00 lacs. In fact, the magnitude of fraud is still under investigation and at this stage, if the petitioner is admitted to anticipatory bail, it is definitely going to impact further investigation of the case in an adverse manner. The recovery of the amount alleged to have been embezzled by the petitioner is yet to be effected and if the petitioner is admitted to bail, the recovery of the said amount may not be possible without his arrest and custodial interrogation”
The Bench noted, “The Investigating Agency after entering into correspondence with the bank, found that the bank statements which the petitioner had forwarded to the complainant were found to be forged as the same were not found to be coinciding with the entries made in the bank statements in respect of the account of the petrol pump. The Investigating Agency has sent the alleged forged bank statements to FSL for obtaining the opinion. As per the report of the Investigating Agency, the material collected by it shows that the petitioner is involved in commission of offence under Section 316, 318(4), 336(3), 340(2) and 338 of BNSS.”
Consequently, the Court ordered, “For all the aforesaid reasons, I do not find any merit in this petition. The same is dismissed accordingly.”
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Application.
Cause Title: Adil Hamid Wani v. UT of J&K (Bail App No.71/2025)
Appearance:
Petitioner: Advocate Aswad R. Attar
Respondent: GA Ilyas Laway; Senior Advocate Jahangir Iqbal Ganai; Advocates Mehnaz Rather and Khursheed Ahmad Dar