Crl. Misc. No. M-16505 of 2011 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Case No. : Crl. Misc. No. M-16505 of 2011 Date of Decision : December 14, 2011 Malkiat Chand .... Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL * * * Present : Mr. K. S. Dhaliwal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Kartar Singh, DAG, Haryana. Mr. Kuldeep Tiwari, Advocate for the complainant. * * * L. N. MITTAL, J. (Oral) : Accused Malkiat Chand has filed this petition for anticipatory bail in case FIR No.85 dated 30.03.2011, under Sections 406, 420 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (in short – IPC), registered at Police Station Pehowa, District Kurukshetra. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. Petitioner's co-accused Avtar Singh received Rs.1,70,000/- Crl. Misc. No. M-16505 of 2011 2 from the complainant for sending him to Poland and subsequently gave some documents including visa, ticket and agreement from some Company, but the said documents were found to be fake. The complainant moved complaint before police against Avtar Singh. Thereupon, in Panchayat convened by Avtar Singh in Police Station, present petitioner Malkiat Chand undertook to return the amount of Rs.1,70,000/- along with passport etc. to the complainant, if Avtar Singh failed to give the same up to 25.09.2010. However, when the complainant approached the petitioner, he not only refused to give the amount and documents, but also threatened the complainant. Counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that the petitioner has not committed any offence. On the other hand, learned State counsel as well as counsel for the complainant contended that Avtar Singh was let off on the guarantee of the petitioner, but the petitioner, instead of honouring the guarantee, threatened the complainant. I have carefully considered the rival contentions. The petitioner sought many adjournments for getting Avtar Singh arrested, but the main accused Avtar Singh, who was earlier let off on the assurance and guarantee of the petitioner, has not yet been arrested. The petitioner, having assured to pay the amount and documents to the complainant, has not paid the same and thus, prima facie, committed fraud with the complainant by getting Avtar Singh let off on the assurance of Crl. Misc. No. M-16505 of 2011 3 giving the amount and documents and also threatened the complainant, when he demanded the same. In view of the aforesaid, without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, the petitioner does not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail. Dismissed. December 14, 2011 ( L. N. MITTAL ) monika JUDGE