In the High Court for the States of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM.M-31114 of 2009 Decided on 16.11.2009. Sukhwinder Singh -- Petitioner vs. The State of Punjab --Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr.D.R.Punia,Advocate,for the petitioner Mr.R.S.Rawat,A.AG,Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: This is a petition under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short,'Cr.P.C.'), for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.187 dated 11.9.2009 registered under Sections 420,465,467,468,469,471,474 IPC, at Police Station, Shahkot, District Jalandhar. The aforesaid FIR has been registered on the complaint of S.D.M, Shahkot, in which it is alleged that he had cancelled the registration of vehicle No. PB-67-B- 1414 TATA SAFARI 403066- GRZNJ2310,2.2 LDICOR GRZNJ 20880,2009, Sarbjit Singh son of Charan Singh village Phazalwal, Tehsil Shahkot (2) PB-67-B 1515, BOLLARD 82022944, GB 84049375, 2008, Mehar Singh son of Jivan Singh Village Noorpur, Tehsil Nakodar, (3) PB-67B- 3636, SCORPIO 72G86969, BS74G42341, 2008, Mehar Singh son of Charan Singh Village Noorpur Channa, Tehsil Nakodar (4) PB-67B-7676- BOLLARO, 82 G10347, GA84P28762,2008, Mangal Singh son of Jagdev Singh village Chhak Kalan, Tehsil Nakodar, (5) PB-67B- 2626, scorpio 72K89737, BS74R07089, 2008, shingara Singh son of CRM-M 31114 of 2009 -2- village Khurlapur Tehsil Nakodar (6) PB- 67B-0061 BOLLARO 72 U44714 GB 72U82494,2008, Sohan Singh son of JawalaSingh Village Saidpur Zhiri, which were found to be fake and forged. The petitioner is stated to be involved in preparation of forged registration certificate and sale of the said vehicles on the pretext of being an agent of a company,who takes in possession the vehicles from the possession of the parties. Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner had applied for anticipatory bail before the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Jalandhar but remained unsuccessful. Learned counsel for the petitioner has, interalia, argued that the petitioner is not named in the FIR nor he is employed in any company as he is doing agricultural work. On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has submitted that there are specific allegations against the petitioner of his participation in the aforesaid offence and the case is at the initial stage of investigation. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case for grant of anticipatory bail. Hence, the bail petition is hereby dismissed. 16.11.2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge