HC denies bail in Rs 100-cr 'Governor appointment' fraud case
Nearly five years after a Hansi resident was allegedly approached with a promise of appointing him as Lt Governor of Andaman and Nicobar, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has denied anticipatory bail to an accused in the "Rs 100 crore fraud". Among other things, the accused claimed he was only being used as a “money mule”.
Justice Anoop Chitkara noted in his order, the erosion of integrity in public perception before pointing out how the sanctity of constitutional posts, such as that of a Governor, was weakened by the belief that the position could be obtained through monetary means. Such notions, the court observed, reflected the troubling reality of how power and influence were often misused.
"The Governor's post is the highest post under the Indian Constitution in every State of the Union of India. Unfortunately, Surender Malik believed that he could have been appointed as Governor by paying money, which depicts the public perception of ground realities, the power of money, and how people can procure what they wish by finding the right person or a con contacting them. If the petitioner is granted bail, it would send a very negative message to the people of India," Justice Chitkara asserted.
An FIR in the matter was registered on August 22, last year, at the Hansi city police station in Hisar district for criminal breach of trust and cheating under Sections 406 and 420 of the IPC. It was alleged that petitioner Dalbir Singh and other accused, including an inspector in the Haryana Police, demanded Rs 100 crore to appoint Surender Malik as the Governor of Andaman and Nicobar.
As per the alleged deal, Rs 30 crore was to be paid in advance. The accused allegedly received Rs 10.45 crore. Of this amount, Rs 1 crore was received by the petitioner in his account. Apprehending arrest in the FIR, he moved the Hisar court but approached the high court after his anticipatory bail was rejected by the Sessions Court.
Dismissing the plea, Justice Chitkara asserted: “Photographs, WhatsApp chats, and the investigation duly corroborate the money paid by Surender Malik. The transfer of Rs 1 crore in the petitioner’s account further corroborates it. The petition is silent about receiving such massive money in his account. Although, as per petitioner’s counsel, Surender Malik expired on June 9, 2023, and there was no dispute until the filing of the complaint, the death would not close the fraud that had taken place with him, and further, according to the complainant’s counsel, he had died due to the shock from the same.”
The court added there was sufficient prima facie evidence connecting the petitioner with the crime, his involvement, and his complete knowledge. As such, he was not entitled to bail. “A perusal of the bail petition and the documents attached prima facie points towards the petitioner’s involvement and does not make out a case for anticipatory bail. The impact of crime would also not justify anticipatory bail”.
