Court Rejects Bail Plea Of Forgery Accused | Kanpur News


Kanpur: Additional sessions judge Kanpur Nagar Vikas Goyal on Friday rejected the bail applications of Shalini Singh, Monika Singh and Neetu Verma, who have been charged by the police for cheating, misappropriation of funds, and preparing forged documents.
Complainant Jatin Mandhyan lodged a report at the Govind Nagar police station on February 15, 2022 stating therein that one Dharam Singh had entered into an agreement with him on October 23, 2019 to sell a freehold house number 14/H-2, Block 14 Dabouli measuring 167.22 square metres, and as per agreement the cost of house was settled as Rs 2.65 crore.
The complainant through a bank draft had transferred Rs 3.01 lakh as advance to Dharam Singh and the latter promised to execute sale deed in financial year 2020-21 in favour of the purchaser. Jatin paid Rs 8,75,000 to Dharam Singh on demand. Broker Harish Lalwani helped in executing a registered agreement on March 16, 2020 and handed over the possession of the said house to him.
Jatin said Dharam Singh died on June 22, 2020 after which he contacted his legal heirs Shalini Singh, Pushpa Singh, Manoj Kumar Singh , Neetu Verma and Monika Singh and promised them that he was willing to pay the balance amount to them and they should execute a sale deed to which they gave their consent.
The complainant claimed that on demand he had paid a sum of Rs 30 lakh to them on different dates, and by that time he had paid them around Rs 1,14,50,000 in cash and Rs 33.01 lakh through bank transfer. Jati stated that to make the payment, he had taken a loan of Rs 92 lakh from Punjab National Bank. In the beginning the accused had assured him to execute the sale deed soon but later they refused to do so. They threatened him and said forget whatever you had paid.
Jatin apprehended that the accused were preparing forged documents to trap the house in litigation and save the same and usurp the money received against the sale agreement. The court in view of all the facts placed on record and circumstances and seriousness of the offence, there was not sufficient ground to grant them anticipatory bail, hence the anticipatory bail of all the three accused was being rejected.





Source link

Leave a Reply