Delhi High Court refuses bail to person accused of issuing fake admission letters to gullible MBBS aspirants

The Delhi High Court recently refused bail to a person accused in an FIR concerning a large-scale fraud involving the issuance of fake admission letters and fake receipts to the gullible MBBS aspirants (Nikhil Gaurav vs State)..The order was passed by a single-judge Bench of Justice Subramoium Prasad..As per the FIR, a company called 'Crack Ur Career Private Limited' received "substantial amounts of money" from parents of aspiring medical students in the pretext of facilitating admission in MBBS courses..The company projected that it had tie-up with various universities and they could help students in getting admission..The investigation revealed that when parents of students started demanding admission letters from the colleges, the accused persons copied the format of admission letters of different colleges and started issuing fake admission letters to the students. .When the students came to know that the admission letters were fake, the accused closed their offices and ran away..FIR was registered for the commission of offences under Sections 420, 120-B and 34 of Indian Penal Code and subsequently, chargesheet was filed stating that there was sufficient material to proceed against the accused..Seeking bail in the FIR, the petitioner claimed that since the FIR was only registered against the company, he, as an employee, could not be made vicariously liable..It was further submitted that since the charge-sheet had been filed, the petitioner should now be released..The prosecution opposed the bail on the ground that the petitioner was part of a "large-scale conspiracy" and investigation was still being carried out with respect to three accused. The Court was informed that five accused were absconding and that the petitioner was also an accused in another FIR for the murder of one of the directors of Crack Ur Career Pvt. Ltd..While arriving at its decision, the Court observed that FIR was not an Encyclopedia and that the complainants had given the name of the company to which money was paid..It was only during the course of the investigation that the names of the persons responsible for the large-scale fraud came to light, the Court noted. .The Court also considered that there had been no change in circumstances since the last time the petitioner's bail application was rejected by the trial court and that five accused persons were absconding..It also stated that there was a reasonable apprehension of the petitioner tampering with the evidence which could be gathered in the investigation which was still underway.."Keeping in mind the magnitude of the offence and the fact that the petitioner is also an accused in a murder case this Court is not inclined to enlarge the petitioner on bail at this stage," the Court opined. .Advocate Naresh Panwar appeared for the petitioner. APP Meenakshi Chauhan appeared for State..[Read Order]