Lovepreet Singh v. State Of Punjab

SANDEEP KUMAR 2024.09.27 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

 

 3.

Learned counsel for petitioner argued that present petitioner is falsely implicated in this case. He had merely introduced the complainant with Edu. Global Vaidik Private Limited, Inderpuri, New Delhi. In-fact, entire amount was received by them. He is not involved in any other case. He is ready to join the investigation. Therefore, his anticipatory bail may be allowed.

4.

Bail application is opposed by learned counsel representing State. Detailed status report has been filed in which allegations levelled by complainant are confirmed. It is further pointed out that petitioner got transferred Rs.24.77 lakhs from complainant through google pay in the bank accounts and thereafter petitioner sent fake visa and tickets. Considering the nature of allegations, petitioner is not entitled to be released on anticipatory bail.

5.

I have considered the arguments and have gone through the record. Facts mentioned in the FIR clearly indicates that it is a case of receiving huge amount on the pretext of sending complainant and her husband to foreign country and after receiving huge amount they were handed over fake visa and other travelling documents. Even Air Tickets were fake. Matter requires thorough investigation. Considering the gravity of offence, it is not a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail and the same is accordingly declined.

        



 ! "

# $%& '(" $)

* + (,)

 ! "

" #)"!$-. * + (,) SANDEEP KUMAR 2024.09.27 16:53 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document