Crl.Misc. No.M-24926 of 2011 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc. No.M-24926 of 2011. Date of decision: September 05, 2011. Gajinder Singh Manocha .. Petitioner VERSUS State of Punjab .. Respondent * * * CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE M.M.S.BEDI * * * PRESENT Mr.Gurcharan Dass, Advocate, for the petitioner. * * * M.M.S.BEDI, J (ORAL). Petitioner seeks the concession of pre-arrest bail in a case registered at the instance of Assistant Manager, State Bank of India, Ludhiana, alleging that the petitioner had got a loan of ` 7.70 lacs from the said bank by mortgaging his house on 27.12.2004. Thereafter, he obtained cash credit limit on 10.01.2005, for a sum of ` 8 lacs without disclosing the earlier loan. Counsel for the petitioner has contended that the petitioner had been involved in another FIR No.109 of 29.07.2011, in which there are general allegations of fraud against the petitioner. In FIR No.109, registered on the basis of secret information, the general allegations had been levelled that Rajinder Singh, Parminder Crl.Misc. No.M-24926 of 2011 Singh, Jasbir Singh and the petitioner had constituted a gang and the said persons were involved in getting fictitious sale deeds through Jasbir Singh and they had obtained loans worth lacs of rupees by mortgaging fictitious sale deeds of same Wasika numbers. They had allegedly duped State Bank of Bikaner, HDFC Bank, LIC Housing Corporation, Oriental Bank of Commerce and Canara Bank. Counsel for the petitioner has vehemently contended that the petitioner was arrested in FIR No.109 and was released on bail after 10 months. The contents of present FIR are also the subject matter of the earlier FIR. The cognizance cannot be taken separately after lodging second FIR. On asking of the Court, counsel for the petitioner has also placed on record, a copy of the supplementary challan presented against the petitioner, Parminder Singh, Karan Kumar and Jasbir Singh in FIR No.109 and also the charge sheet in aid of FIR. I have gone through the allegations and the material in earlier FIR No.109 and the allegations in the present FIR. Two different offences have been committed by the petitioner on different occasions by using the same document with the same co- accused persons. Different amounts have been obtained from different financial institutions to play fraud with the said institutions. A separate trial for separate transactions is permissible. No doubt, the cognizance of the offence alleged in the present FIR could have been included in the first general FIR, but on this ground, the Crl.Misc. No.M-24926 of 2011 petitioner cannot be granted the concession of pre-arrest bail. The circumstances may warrant the grant of regular bail after the petitioner surrenders before the Illaqua Magistrate or is arrested by the Investigating Agency. No ground is made out for the grant of pre-arrest bail. Dismissed. (M.M.S.BEDI) JUDGE September 05, 2011. rka