Crl. Misc No. M-7228 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc No. M-7228 of 2009 Date of decision : 26.03.2009 Vivek Gupta and another ....Petitioners V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent. BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Hitesh Kaplish, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG Punjab. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition for pre-arrest bail in FIR No. 392 registered against the petitioners under Sections 420/406 IPC at police station city Phagwara, District Kapurthala. Counsel for the petitioners has argued that the petitioners have been falsely implicated in this case. According to the counsel, the FIR has been lodged as a result of some civil dispute between the parties. The complainant- Madan Lal has purchased some cement from the shop of the petitioners but had not made the payment for the same. Due to this, civil suit was filed by the petitioners against the said Madan Lal. Counsel, thus, submits that the instant FIR has been lodged as a sequel to the civil dispute. Learned counsel for the State, has however, opposed the bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature and their custodial interrogation is required for the purpose of investigation. I have heard learned counsel for the parties. Crl. Misc No. M-7228 of 2009 2 It is evident from the record that allegations against the petitioners are that they along with co-accused Baljeet Kaur duped the complainant of Rs. 5,00,000/- after promising the complainant, that his son would be sent to Australia. Instead the son of the complainant was sent to Malaysia, where he remained stranded for 25 days. The complainant, thereafter, requested the accused to return the amount paid to them. However, the petitioners refused. Keeping in view the nature of allegations against the petitioners and gravity of offence and also the fact that their custodial interrogation may be necessary, I do not find it a fit case for grant of concession of anticipatory bail. Hence, the petition is devoid of merit. The same is dismissed. 26.03.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE