IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-25491 of 2009 Date of decision : October 14, 2009 Gurtej Singh @ Geji ....Petitioner versus State of Punjab ....Respondent Coram: Hon'ble Mr. Justice L.N. Mittal Present : Mr. Arihant Jain, Advocate, for the petitioner Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, AAG Punjab L.N. Mittal, J. (Oral) Gurtej Singh alias Geji has filed this petition for bail in case FIR No. 15 dated 24.2.2007 under sections 420, 109 IPC and section 10 of Immigration Act, Police Station Sangat, District Bathinda. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to the prosecution version, three complainants paid Rs 1 lac each to petitioner's co-accused Amar Nath (since deceased) for sending them to Singapore on work permit for three years. However, they were not sent. Petitioner's co-accused Piara Singh, Saminder Singh alias Pamma and Gurcharan Singh took the complainants to Delhi for medical examination on 25.10.2004. In all ten persons from different places were taken. The complainants were told that their flight for Singapore is on Criminal Misc. No. M-25491 of 2009 -2- 14.3.2005 but even on that date, they were not sent. Amar Nath gave affidavit on 8.4.2005 undertaking to return the amount of the complainants on or before 23.4.2005. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that no role has been attributed to the petitioner nor any amount was paid to him nor the petitioner took the complainants to Delhi for medical examination. Learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Mukhtiar Singh, contended that the petitioner remained absconding and was declared proclaimed offender but is now in custody since 26.7.2009. It was also contended that the petitioner's co-accused Saminder Singh has made statement that the money was distributed amongst all the accused. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. The entire amount, as per complainant's allegations, was given to Amar Nath. The petitioner was not even amongst the three persons who had taken the complainants to Delhi for medical examination. No role whatsoever has been attributed to the petitioner in the entire FIR. In view of the aforesaid but without meaning to express any opinion on the merits, the instant bail petition is allowed. Bail to the satisfaction of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate/Duty Magistrate, Bathinda. ( L.N. Mittal ) October 14, 2009 Judge 'dalbir'