IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. M-7344 of 2009 Date of decision: 27th March, 2009 Manoj Kumar … Petitioner Versus State of Haryana … Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA Present: Mr. Amit Parashar, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S. Mor, Senior DAG Haryana for the State. KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA, J. (ORAL) Present petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No. 212 dated 05.03.2009 registered at Police Station City Ballabgarh, District Faridabad under Sections 420, 406, 467, 468, 471,120-B IPC. On March 18, 2009 this Court had passed the following order: “Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that though in the FIR, the allegations are that the petitioner along with Sarvotam alias Vishal Gupta and Monu alias Hardeep had duped the complainant of Rs.2,00,000/- on the promise of obtaining loan from him for purchase of the house, yet most of the allegations are against Vishal Gupta alias Sarvotam. What is the role played by the petitioner? can only surface during investigation. Criminal Misc. No. M-7344 of 2009 At this stage, counsel for the petitioner submits that complainant has been duped of Rs.2,00,000/- allegedly by three persons and to prove his bonafide that the petitioner was not one who was party or accessory to the crime, the petitioner can deposit Rs.50,000/- in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad, subject to final outcome of the decision without prejudice to the defence to be raised by the petitioner. Let petitioner deposit Rs.50,000/- in the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad, within ten days from today. Issue notice of motion to learned Advocate General, Haryana for 27.3.2009 Meanwhile, in the event of arrest, petitioner shall be released on interim bail to the satisfaction of the Arresting Officer. Petitioner shall join investigation as and when called for. Petitioner shall also abide by the conditions specified under Section 438(2) Cr.P.C.” Counsel for the petitioner has submitted that Rs.50,000/- have been deposited by the petitioner in the Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate, Faridabad. Counsel for the State has not denied this fact but however, has stated that co-accused, in a disclosure statement, has submitted that entire amount of Rs.2.00 lakh is with the petitioner and it has been further submitted that interrogation of the petitioner is required to know the whereabouts of the third co-accused, Hardip. Hardip has been specifically mentioned in the FIR. Co- accused has been interrogated. Petitioner has shown his bonafide by depositing Rs.50,000/-. Therefore, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. 2 Criminal Misc. No. M-7344 of 2009 In view of this, present petition is allowed and interim bail granted to the petitioner vide order dated March 17, 2009 is made absolute till submission of report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. (challan). Thereafter, petitioner will be permitted to furnish regular bail bonds to the satisfaction of the trial Court. [KANWALJIT SINGH AHLUWALIA] JUDGE March 27, 2009 rps 3