Crl.M.No.M-15319 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-15319 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: May 24, 2010 Dinesh Kumar Gupta and another .....Petitioners v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Tarunveer Vashisth, Advocate for the petitioners. ...... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in case FIR No.51, dated 29.4.2010, under Sections 409, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station City Ropar, District Ropar. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners and have gone through the whole record carefully. The present FIR has been lodged by Post Master, Head Post Office, Ropar, against the present petitioners, who were working as agents of the post office and were attached to Head Post Office, Ropar. They used to collect deposits from depositors and used to deposit the same in the Post Office and used to make entries in the pass-books of the depositors. However, it came out that though entries of Rs.60,000/- were made on different dates in PPF pass-book Account No.102864 and, however, the money was not actually deposited in the post office. Lateron when fraud was deducted, the amount of Rs.60,000/- alongwith Rs.5000/- interest was deposited. Another fraud has also been deducted regarding R.D.Account Nos.54615 and 55013 and it came out that a sum of Rs.73700/- was misappropriated by the petitioners, as the said amount was also collected by them from the account-holders and though entries were made in the pass- books, however, amount was not deposited in the post office. Enquiry was Crl.M.No.M-15319 of 2010 (O&M) -2- conducted in the matter by DSP, Ropar and after enquiry the present FIR was registered. There are serious allegations against petitioners-accused. They had been cheating the customers as well as the post office. Hence, custodial interrogation of the petitioners is necessary to ascertain their modus operandi to commit fraud. Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioners- accused. Hence, in view of these facts and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioners- Dinesh Kumar Gupta and Veena Rani, for grant of anticipatory bail is dismissed being devoid of any merit. 24.5.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge