Research › Search › Judgment

Himachal Pradesh High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 3484 (HP)

Kewal Krishan v. State of Himachal Pradesh

2025-09-18

Virender Singh

body2025
JUDGMENT : Virender Singh, J. Petitioner – Kewal Krishan, has filed the present petition, under Section 438/442 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (hereinafter referred to as the 'BNSS'), against the order dated 20.11.2024, passed by the Court of learned Special Judge, Shimla (hereinafter referred to as the trial Court), in Application No.2162/2024, in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2024, titled as State of Himachal Pradesh versus Chander Mohan & Others. 2. Vide order dated 20.11.2024, the learned trial Court has dismissed the application, filed by the Kewal Krishan (petitioner), under Section 451 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as the Cr.PC), by holding that the same is not maintainable. 3. As per the record, petitioner Kewal Krishan, who has been impleaded, as one of the accused, in Sessions Trial No.1 of 2024, arising out of FIR No. 266 of 2023, dated 19.10.2023, registered with Police Station Balh, District Mandi, H.P., under Sections 420 and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’) and Sections 21 and 23 of the Banning of Unregulated Deposit Scheme Act, 2019. 4. By way of the said application, a prayer has been made that the petitioner and his wife are having joint Saving Account, bearing No.20045958019, with State Bank of India, Amb Branch, Una. The said bank account was freezed, by the Police, in the above titled case. As such, the petitioner could not make any transaction in the said account. 5. It is the further case of the petitioner that the petitioner is a pensioner and his Department credits the pension to the said account, but, due to the fact that his account has been freezed, the petitioner is unable to withdraw the amount of pension, in order to meet his day- to-day expenditure. 6. According to the petitioner, investigation, in the present case, is complete and no useful purpose would be served by freezing the bank account. 7. On the basis of the above facts, the petitiner has prayed, before the learned trial Court, that the application may kindly be allowed and the above bank account may kindly be ordered to be defreezed. 8. According to the petitioner, investigation, in the present case, is complete and no useful purpose would be served by freezing the bank account. 7. On the basis of the above facts, the petitiner has prayed, before the learned trial Court, that the application may kindly be allowed and the above bank account may kindly be ordered to be defreezed. 8. When put to notice, the police has filed the status report, disclosing therein, that on 19.10.2023, Rajesh Saini, son of Dev Raj Saini, moved a complaint, disclosing therein, that he has been cheated of Rs.12,60,390/- by Ramesh Chauhan, Rohit, Rajinder Sood, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar through qtrade9.com,qfx.co.in. and QFX Trade Limited Company. 8.1. According to the complainant, in the year 2022, Rohit and Ramesh came to him and explained him about the QFX Trade Limited Company. According to them, their company is investing the amount in FOREX (online digital platform) and they used to get 5% return of the amount invested. 8.2. Being impressed from them, he has deposited a sum of Rs.12,60,390/- in the account given by them bearing Account No. 520481028803179 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk and Account No. 203915140000019 of Union Bank of India, Ner Chowk. At the insistence of Rohit and Ramesh Chauhan, he has held a meeting with the Directors of the Company namely, Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar. The above named persons are stated to be receiving the money from the people on the pretext of good returns and they used to cheat the people. They have also established their office in Ner Chowk. The complainant, as well as, other persons have been apprised about the investment plan of 11 months. Thereafter, they have assured the return by way of cheque. On their assurance, number of persons have invested huge amount. The amount, invested by the complainant, was used by them, but, no amount has been returned to him. They have given him post dated cheques, but, the account, out of which, those cheques were issued, was found to be blocked. 8.3. The complainant has further alleged, in the complaint, that they had collected the money by cheating and alluring them to return a good amount. Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar have introduced themselves as Directors of the Company. 8.4. 8.3. The complainant has further alleged, in the complaint, that they had collected the money by cheating and alluring them to return a good amount. Rajinder Sood, resident of Jogindernagar, Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar have introduced themselves as Directors of the Company. 8.4. On the basis of above facts, he has requested that action be taken against Ramesh Chauhan having mobile No. 77194-94553, Rohit, resident of Karsog, having mobile No. 98576-40014, Rajinder Sood resident of Jogindernagar, having mobile No. 82195-08987 and Santosh Kumar and Vineet Kumar having mobile No.97366-66666 and other persons, who are involved in this case. 9. On the basis of above facts, the police registered the FIR under Section 420 read with Section 34 IPC. 10. It is the further case of the police that during investigation, involvement of 11 accused persons was found, out of which, 7 have already been released on bail. According to the police, petitioner Kewal Krishan has used the said account in order to receive the ill-gotten money. The petitioner, along with his wife, has received a sum of Rs.1,20,00,000/-, as the proceed of the crime. 11. Lastly, it has been apprehended that in case, the said bank account is defreezed, then the petitioner may again indulge in the similar activities. 12. Learned trial Court, has thereafter, dismissed the application, vide order dated 20.11.2024, which has been assailed, before this Court, mainly, on the ground that the learned trial Court, has not appreciated the fact that the petitioner is receiving his pension, in the said account, and as such, the said account has been sought to be defreezed. 13. During the pendency of the proceedings, the petitioner has moved Cr.MP No.3017 of 2025 and placed on record the certificate issued by the State Bank of India, according to which, Kewal Krishan son of Shri Roop Chand resident of village and Post Office Takarala, Tehsil Amb, District Una, i.e., petitioner, is receiving pension, in account No.20045958019 and as per the certificate till 10.07.2025, a sum of Rs.3,84,956/- has been credited, in this account, as pension of Kewal Krishan. 14. 14. In view of the stand as taken by the Police, before the learned trial Court especially, the fact that the petitioner and his wife have received a sum of Rs.1,20,00,000/-, as proceed of crime, in the said account, this Court is of the view that the petitioner is not able to make out a case to interfere with the order passed by the learned trial Court. 15. However, considering the fact that the amount of pension cannot be freezed, in view of the provisions of Section 11 of the Pension Act, 1871 and the provisions of Section 60(1)(g) of the Code of Civil Procedure, the petitioner is entitled to the relief, qua release of the amount, credited into the said account, on account of his pension. Section 11 of the Pension Act, is reproduced, as under: “11. Exemption of pension from attachment. - No pension granted or continued by Government on political considerations, or on account of past services or present infirmities or as a compassionate allowance, and no money due or to become due on account of any such pension or allowance, shall be liable to seizure, attachment or sequestration by process of any Court at the instance of a creditor, for, any demand against the pensioner, or in satisfaction of a decree or order of any such Court. 16. Section 60(1)(g) of the Code of Civil Procedure, is reproduced, as under:- (g) stipends and gratuities allowed to pensioners of the Government or of a local authority or of any other employer, or payable out of any service family pension fund notified in the Official Gazette by the Central Government or the State Government in this behalf, and political pensions; 17. Accordingly, the amount, i.e., Rs.3,84,956/-, credited towards pension, to account No.20045958019, as on 10.07.2025, and the amount, if any, credited to the said account thereafter, on account of pension, is ordered to be released, in favour of the petitioner, with a direction to the petitioner to take up the matter with the authorities to credit his pension, in some other bank account. 18. With these observations, the present petition is disposed of, so also the pending miscellaneous application(s), if any. Send down the record.