The petitioner sought anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. alleging fraud. The court examined facts of a Rs. 20 lac fraud and a dishonoured cheque. The court dismissed the petition for lack of merit for extraordinary relief.
Petition for grant of anticipatory bail was dismissed as it was devoid of any merit.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
-1-
Crl.M.No.M-17608 of 2010 (O&M)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Crl.M.No.M-17608 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 1, 2010
Balwinder Singh
.....Petitioner
v.
The State of Punjab
.....Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA
Present: Mr.SPS Sidhu, Advocate for the petitioner.
RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral)
The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.97, dated 11.5.2010, under Sections 420, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station City Ferozepur, District Ferozepur.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully.
Brief allegations against petitioner-accused are that he extracted a sum of Rs.20 lacs from the petitioner on the plea that he would send her son Gurdarshan Singh to USA or he would get him employed as he was having approach with politicians of the State. The said amount of Rs.20 lacs was paid by the complainant to the petitioner after selling her land. However, neither the petitioner got employed the son of the complainant nor sent his son to USA and the amount was also not returned. Hence, the petitioner has played a big fraud upon the complainant. As per own admission of the petitioner, he had given a cheque of Rs.20,000/- to the complainant, which was dishonored and hence the complainant also filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act regarding dishonoring of the said cheque.
Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused.
-2-
Crl.M.No.M-17608 of 2010 (O&M)
Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitionerBalwinder Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit.
1.7.2010
meenu
(Ram Chand Gupta) Judge
1 issue framed by the court
Whether anticipatory bail under Section 438 Cr.P.C. should be granted given allegations of fraud involving large sums and dishonoured cheques.
3 provisions across 3 enactments
Balwinder Singh
The State of Punjab
Ram Chand Gupta
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
