Simranjeet Singh And Another v. State Of Punjab

-1CRM-M-38383 of 2019

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA

AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M-38383 of 2019 Date of Decision: 02.03.2020 Simranjeet Singh and another

...Petitioners

Versus

State of Punjab and another ....Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAMENDRA JAIN Present:- Mr. A.S. Rai, Advocate, for the petitioners.

Mr. Pawan Sharda, Sr. DAG, Punjab.

Mr. R.S. Sekhon, Advocate, for the complainant. RAMENDRA JAIN, J. (ORAL) Through instant petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. prayer has been made for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.69 dated 01.05.2019 registered under Sections 420 and 120-B IPC at Police Station Guruharsahai, District Ferozepur.

According to prosecution, petitioners running a company in the name and style of M/s Eckrox Solutions Private Ltd., cheated complainants Swaran and Navneet Singh for `15.00 lakh on the false pretext of providing them Fast Tag agency in the areas of Ferozepur and Tarn Taran, out of which `6.00 lakh was deposited in the name of Manjinder Singh and `1.5 lakh in the name of aforesaid company of the petitioners. But they did not allot any agency/dealership to the aforesaid complainants and only handed over Fast Tags worth `2.57 lakh.

Learned counsel inter alia contends that there was no privity of RAVINDER SINGH 2020.03.07 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document

-2CRM-M-38383 of 2019 contract between petitioners and complainants. It is only respondent No.2 who might have cheated the complainants. Petitioners have falsely been implicated. They are not required for any custodial interrogation. Refuting above submissions, learned State counsel, assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, submits that in a video recording, petitioners have admitted their guilt. Therefore, they are required for custodial interrogation.

Considering overall facts and circumstances, this Court is not inclined to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners, inasmuch as they are definitely required for custodial interrogation. Dismissed.

(RAMENDRA JAIN) March 02, 2020 JUDGE R.S.

Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No Whether Reportable Yes/No RAVINDER SINGH 2020.03.07 14:13 I attest to the accuracy and integrity of this document