CRM-M No.25463 of 2011(O&M) ::1:: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM-M No.25463 of 2011 (O&M) Date of decision : 21.12.2011 Sukhwinder Singh ...... Petitioner v. State of Punjab and another ...... Respondents *** CORAM : HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY TEWARI *** Present : Mr. C.K. Singla, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. J.S. Brar, A.A.G., Punjab. Mr. F.S. Virk, Advocate for respondent No.2. *** AJAY TEWARI, J. (Oral) This petition has been filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.98 dated 20.07.2011 registered under Sections 420, 406 IPC at Police Station Bhawanigarh. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that there is a delay of six years in lodging the present FIR. He has further argued that in CRM-M No.25463 of 2011(O&M) ::2:: one inquiry the petitioner was found not guilty. On 15.09.2011 the following order was passed:- “This is a dispute between real brother and sister. Learned counsel for the parties have suggested that it would be appropriate if some close relatives intervene in this family dispute. It has been agreed that Amrik Singh, who is the mother's brother, Balwinder Singh, who is the brother of the parties, and Daler Singh, who is also the brother-in-law of the parties will act as mediators so that this dispute can be resolved. The matter is referred to the Mediation Centre of this Court. Let the parties alongwith the three mediators appear before the Mediation Centre on 26.09.2011. Interim order to continue.” Thereafter, this case has been returned by the Mediation Centre with the report that the parties could not reach at any amicable settlement. Today Balwinder Singh, who is the brother of the parties, Amrik Singh, who is the mama of the parties and Iqbal Singh, who is the father of the parties are also present in Court. Balwinder Singh and Amrik Singh have both stated that the petitioner has taken money from the complainant. The father of the parties has stated that he has no knowledge about the transaction between his son and daughter. Learned Assistant Advocate General on instructions from ASI Nirmal Singh has informed the Court that the inquiry in this case was conducted by the SSP himself and it was after full investigation he found that in fact the petitioner did take the money from his sister-complainant and CRM-M No.25463 of 2011(O&M) ::3:: owed her the money. In the circumstances, in view of inquiry of the SSP and the statements of the common relatives before the mediators, it is difficult for the Court to allow this petition. Consequently, the petition is dismissed. ( AJAY TEWARI ) December 21, 2011 JUDGE ashish