Crl.M.No.M-26572 of 2010 (O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-26572 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision:September 13, 2010 Harbans Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Nakul Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.No.47435 of 2010 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-26572 of 2010 The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.84, dated 26.6.2010, under Sections 420, 465, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Sadar, Mukatsar. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sri Muktsar Sahib, dismissing the application of anticipatory bail filed on behalf of the present petitioner. Brief allegations against the petitioner-accused are that he was owner of a truck, which was sold by him to the complainant and he obtained Rs.3,15,000/- from the complainant. However, the said truck was already got financed by the petitioner-accused and on the pretext of clearing the loan, he took the tractor and handed over the same to the finance Company from whom he had taken the loan. However, he did not clear the said loan and hence he cheated the complainant-party. Possession of the tractor was taken by the finance company from whom loan was taken by the present petitioner-accused. Though there is a dispute as to whether petitioner had Crl.M.No.M-26572 of 2010 (O&M) -2- taken possession of the tractor from the complainant and handed over the same to the finance Company, or as to whether the finance company had taken the possession of the same directly from the complainant, however, in view of the fact that complainant has been cheated of Rs.3,15,000/-, as there was a loan on the tractor and the same was mortgaged with the finance company, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner- Harbans Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 13.9.2010 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge