Rahul Jindal v. State Of Punjab And Others

2024:PHHC:024324 [265]

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-9166-2023 Date of Decision : 21.02.2024 Rahul Jindal

...Petitioner

versus State of Punjab and others ....Respondents Coram :

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE DEEPAK GUPTA Present :

Ms. Manju Goyal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Sahil R. Bakshi, DAG, Punjab.

*** DEEPAK GUPTA, J. (ORAL) [1] Status report by way of affidavit dated 14.12.2023 of Shri Gurpreet Singh, PPS, Deputy Superintendent of Police (City-2), Bathinda, District Bathinda, on behalf of respondent Nos.1 to 6-State has already been filed. The relevant portion of the said status report reads as under:- "

The precise facts of the finding of the inquiry is as follows that Major Singh, Gurlal Singh, Sandeep Singh, Jagtar Singh, Gurmel Singh, Narinder Singh, Satnam Singh Avtar Singh and Sukhdev Singh etc. had invested payment in the company of petitioner i.e. META Trade Technology, on the assurance of the petitioner that he would return rate of interest @ 8% to 15% to the investor. The petitioner used to get deposited Rs. 2500/- as membership fee. The aforesaid persons came under influence of the petitioner and started depositing payment in their respective accounts opened by the petitioner. The petitioner was well aware about account password of the accounts; therefore, he had withdrawn the amount from the account of the aggrieved persons.

Coming to know about commission of cheating, committed by the petitioner in connivance with his family members. The aforesaid persons got registered FIR No.151 dated 29.10.2022, u/s 420,120-B, IPC, PSCantt. Bathinda against petitioner and accomplices. During the course of Inquiry of the petitioner's representation, it was also surfaced that when aforesaid FIR was registered against the petitioner and others, he had RAJNEESH SHARMA 2024.02.

2024:PHHC:024324 CRM-M-9166-2023 -2left the house on the very next day and with the help of Mejor Singh, the petitioner had taken away some items from his own house by unlocking the gates of the house in aesthetic manner and when Mejor Singh demanded his own payment from the petitioner, the dispute was arose between both of them. Resultantly, in counter blast aforesaid FIR, the of the petitioner moved a representation to the Senior Superintendent of Police Bathinda against the aforesaid persons. 5.

The inquiry report of the Station House Officer, PS-Thermal, Bathinda was duly gone through deeply by the answering deponent and after having satisfied with it, the same was forwarded the Senior Superintendent of Police Bathinda. After obtaining legal opinion from District Attorney, Bathinda, the Senior Superintendent of Police Bathinda disposed off the representation of the petitioner.

6. That in view of aforesaid submissions, the present petition is liable to be dismissed in the interest of justice. "

[2] In view of the aforesaid report, the present petition is hereby disposed of with liberty to the petitioner to avail the alternate remedies available to him in accordance with law, including approaching the Area Magistrate concerned, in case he is not satisfied with the report. (DEEPAK GUPTA) JUDGE 21.02.2024 'Rajneesh'

Whether speaking/ reasoned :

Yes/No Whether reportable :

Yes/No RAJNEESH SHARMA 2024.02.21 23:43 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document