CRM-M-27160-2011 [ 1 ] CRM-M-27360-2011 :::::::: IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH (1) CRM-M-27160-2011 Date of decision:31.10.2011 Satwinder Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent (2) CRM-M-27360-2011 Date of decision:31.10.2011 Kuldip Singh ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KUMAR JAIN Present: Mr. D.S.Sandhu, Advocate, for the petitioner(s). Mr. A.S.Rai, DAG, Punjab. ***** Rakesh Kumar Jain, J. (ORAL) This order shall dispose of two petitions bearing CRM-M-27160-2011 titled as 'Satwinder Singh Vs. State of Punjab' [for short “first petition”] and CRM-M-27360-2011 titled as `Kuldip Singh Vs. State of Punjab' [for short “second petition”] in which the petitioner(s) are praying for grant of regular bail in a pending trial case registered vide FIR No.53 dated 03.06.2011, under Sections 406 and 420 IPC and Section 24 of the Immigration Act at Police Station Subhanpur, District Kapurthala. Both the petitioners are in custody from 04.06.2011. It is submitted that the challan has already been presented and the charge has been framed and the case is now fixed for prosecution evidence. Learned counsel for CRM-M-27160-2011 [ 2 ] CRM-M-27360-2011 :::::::: the petitioner further submits that the dispute was with regard to the issuance of a cheque which has been bounced about which a complaint could have been filed as a legal notice (Annexure P-1) was got issued by the complainant on 24.03.2011 but it is submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that since they had not received any notice from the Court with respect to the complaint, if any filed under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 [for short “the Act”], therefore, the present FIR appears to have been registered after the lapse of statutory period. He further submits that the petitioners are neither the previous convicts nor any other case is pending against them. Learned State Counsel, however, submits that it is a case where the petitioners have duped the complainant of a huge amount in the name of sending him abroad. After hearing both the learned counsel for the parties and keeping in view the facts and circumstances of the case but without making any observation on the merits, the present petitions are hereby allowed and the petitioners are ordered to be released on bail on their furnishing bail bonds to the satisfaction of the learned Trial Court. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of another connected case. October 31, 2011 (RAKESH KUMAR JAIN) vinod* JUDGE