Mukhtiar Singh v. State Of Punjab & ANR

In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh .....

Criminal Misc. No.M-37303 of 2018 Date of decision:31.10.2018 Mukhtiar Singh

...Petitioner

v.

State of Punjab and another

...Respondents

....

Coram:

Hon'ble Mr. Justice Inderjit Singh .....

Present:

Mr. S.K. Choudhary, Advocate for Mr. Suresh Kumar Arya, Advocate for the petitioner.

Mr. Pawan Sharda, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State.

.....

Inderjit Singh, J.

The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.111 dated 10.7.2018 registered for the offences under Sections 406, 420 and 506 IPC at Police Station Bhargo Camp, District Jalandhar.

Notice of motion has been issued in this case. Mr. Pawan Sharda, learned Senior Deputy Advocate General, Punjab has appeared on behalf of the respondent-State and contested this petition.

I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned State counsel and have gone through the record. HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2018.11.01 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh

Cr. Misc. No.M-37303 of 2018 [2] From the record, I find that in the present case, the FIR has been registered on the complaint of complainant-Sarvjit Singh. As per the allegations, the present petitioner cheated the complainant by taking `3,50,000/- for his recruitment in Punjab Police. As per the FIR, the amount had been paid by three cheques and even the accused-petitioner returned `1,20,000/- to the complainant in instalments. Keeping in view the serious allegations against the present petitioner, I find that the petitioner is required for custodial interrogation. Further more, earlier learned counsel for the petitioner stated that the petitioner is ready to deposit `2,30,000/- before the trial Court for returning the same to the complainant before the next date of hearing, but even after one more adjournment, the amount has not been deposited. Therefore, I do not find it a fit case where the petitioner is entitled for the grant of anticipatory bail.

Therefore, finding no merit in this petition, the same is dismissed.

October 31, 2018.

(Inderjit Singh) Judge *hsp* NOTE:

Whether speaking/reasoned:

Yes Whether reportable:

No HARPAL SINGH PARMAR 2018.11.01 16:05 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document Chandigarh