In the High Court for the States of Pun jab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM M 15990 of 2009 Decided on July 13,2009. Chander Mohan and another -- Petitioners vs. State of Haryana --Respondent Present: Mr. Ashwani Talwar, Advocate,for the petitioners Mr.Partap Singh,Sr.DAG,Haryana. Mr.APS Deol,Sr.Advocate,with Mr.Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate, for the complainant. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: This is a petition for anticipatory bail filed by the petitioners in a case FIR No.108 dated 03.3.2009, registered under Sections 420, 467,468,471, 406,506,120-B IPC, at Police Station, City Thanesar. In short, the case of the prosecution is that petitioner No.1 (Chander Mohan) posed himself to be the owner of 9 kanals 11 marlas of land situated in village Samana Bahu, District Karnal, to the complainant (Lakhbir Singh). An agreement was executed between them for a sum of Rs.74,00,000/-. Later on, it was agreed that the land in question would be sold to petitioner No.2. (Gaurav Bhardwaj) and a sum of Rs. 15,00,000/- was paid by the complainant to petitioner No.1 towards earnest money, Thereafter, a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- was paid by petitioner No.2. to the complainant. As petitioner No.1 was not the owner of the property in question, therefore, the complainant is stated to have been defrauded by the petitioners. Before coming to this Court, the petitioners had applied for anticipatory bail vide bail application No.136 of 2009 before the learned CRM M 15990 of 2000 -2- Addl.Sessions Judge, Kurukshetra, which was dismissed vide order dated 2.6.2009. Mr.Ashwani Talwar, learned counsel for the petitioners has argued that it is astonishing that the complainant would give Rs.15,00,000/- to petitioner No.1 and would not even get a document executed. It is further submitted that similarly situated accused, namely Sanjay Gaur has already been granted bail by this Court in Crl. Misc.No.9589 of 2009 vide order dated 26.5.2009, therefore, the petitioners also deserve the concession of bail on the principle of parity. Mr.A.P.S. Deol, learned senior counsel appearing for the complainant has submitted that the petitioner No.1 himself had executed an agreement on 28.5.2008 in which he had admitted the receipt of Rs.15,00,000/- from the complainant. Not only this, petitioner No.1 had also endorsed on the said agreement that he would return the amount of Rs.15,00,000/ + Rs.20,000/- by 30.8.2008. This writing was executed on 29.7.2008, but despite that the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- has not been returned. It is further submitted that so far concession of bail in the case of Sanjay Gaur is concerned, even in that case, Mr.Ashwani Talwar,Advocate, appeared and stated as under:- “Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that only role attributed to the petitioner is that he had introduced co-accused Chander Mohan to the complainant. The money in question had also not been taken by the petitioner. Rather the money had been paid by the complainant to co-accused Chander Mohan. Learned counsel has further submitted that CRM M 15990 of 2009 -3- there is no documentary evidence on record with regard to the transaction made by the complainant”. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners, it is prima facie apparent that Rs.15,00,000/- was paid by the complainant to petitioner No.1 who in connivance with petitioner No.2 had committed the offence. It is also worthwhile to mention here that vide order dated 8.6.2009, the petitioners were granted interim anticipatory bail and the matter was adjourned to 2.7.2009. On that date, leaned counsel for the petitioners was asked to return the amount of Rs.15,00,000/- to the complainant, though, it was not so specifically recorded in the order and the case was adjourned for 8.7.2009. On 8.7.2009, learned counsel for the petitioners stated that he wanted to argue on the merits instead. After hearing learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the seriousness of the offence committed, I do not find it to be a fit case to grant concession of anticipatory bail Hence the bail application is hereby dismissed. July 13,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge