Anil Kumar Singh v. State Of Haryana
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
Date of decision: 25.07.2023
...Petitioner
Versus
.....Respondent
!!
!"# $" %" &%
'
(
) *&+ '
,
!"# $" #"+%( **** !! " Through the instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C., the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in case FIR No.404 dated 27.07.2022 registered under Sections 406, 420 IPC, at Police Station Sector-10A, District Gurugram.
Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has falsely been implicated in the present case; that the petitioner and the complainant were having cordial relations since long and petitioner helped her financially during Covid-19 Pandemic period and gave her friendly loan; that the amount shown to be given to the petitioner through cheque is not for allotment of plot in her name, rather the complainant has returned the loan amount to the petitioner.
MANGAL SINGH 2023.07.26 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document
Learned counsel for the complainant submits that the petitioner was a Government employee and taken money from the complainant on the pretext of getting registered the tea shop in her name. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner has left his job and has not committed any fraud with the complainant. I have heard the learned counsel for the parties and have gone through the paper-book.
There are specific allegations against the petitioner and the amount was given to the petitioner through cheque for getting regularized the tea-shop of the complainant but neither the shop has been regularized nor the amount has been returned.
Considering the very nature of the allegations contained in the FIR, the custodial interrogation of the petitioner is must. Hence, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. In view of the above, the present petition is dismissed. !!
#! 25.07.2023 - " .% , / ." - %" 0(/ ." MANGAL SINGH 2023.07.26 19:16 I attest to the accuracy and authenticity of this document