MAHESH BHAGWATI, J. - (1.) THIS order governs the disposal of bail application filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. by Mr. R.P. Garg Advocate on behalf of the applicants pertaining to F.I.R. No. 81/2009 of police station Shivaji Park, Alwar in the offences under Sections 420, 406 and 120-B of IPC.
(2.) HEARD the learned counsel for the petitioners as also learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State and perused the relevant material available on record. Learned counsel for the petitioners has canvassed that the name of the petitioners do not figure in the FIR. They have been falsely implicated and are in no way connected with the commission of alleged offences of the instant case. Neither the petitioners are alleged to have induced any student to part with money nor any money was taken by them. They have been living in Delhi whereas, the institution is being run at Alwar, hence, there being no evidence against the petitioners, they deserve to be released on anticipatory bail. Learned Public Prosecutor appearing for the State has opposed the bail petition on the ground that the petitioner Anup Singh Bansal is found to be the Vice President and Manoj Kumar Gupta, a member of this institution, which is registered at Alwar. Since, they are the office bearer of this Career Para Medical Education Center, Alwar, they are equally liable for all the acts of this institution, hence, the bail petition may be dismissed. Having considered the submissions made at the bar and carefully perused the relevant material available on record including the bail order dated 18.08.2009 rendered by learned Sessions Judge, Alwar, it is noticed that institution gave admission to the students for education in ANM and DMLT courses projecting them and giving an impression that the institution had been registered with PHMT, University, Delhi. The institution had completed the courses and taken examination also but the result was not declared. When the students contacted the University, it was found that this institution was not registered with PHMT, University nor any recommendation had been granted by the University to run the said courses. Thus, the petitioners along with other office bearers of the center are found to have fraudulently cheated the students with dishonest intention and grabbed huge money, which was being taken from them in the form of tuition fees and other fees. The accusations as levelled against the petitioners do not seem to be false, groundless and baseless. It is not a fit case wherein, the petitioners can be granted indulgence of anticipatory bail. The provisions of Section 438 of Cr.P.C. are sparingly used in rarest of rare circumstances. In Pankaj vs. State of Raj., RLW 1996(1) Raj., 628 this court has categorically observed that the provisions of Section 438 are attracted only when it is found that the accusation or allegations levelled against the petitioner are found to be totally false, baseless and groundless. It is for the accused to set out that no prima facie case is made out against him. From the facts on record, it is not reflected that the accusation against the petitioner are totally false and baseless. Hence, in the instant case, the petitioners are not entitled to get the anticipatory bail.
(3.) IN the result, the bail petition filed under Section 438 of Cr.P.C. on behalf of the petitioners namely Anup Kumar Bansal and Manoj Kumar Gupta stands dismissed.;