IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No. 56719- M of 2006 Date of decision : 18.12.2008 Naresh Kumar Gupta and another ....Petitioners Versus State of Haryana and another ...Respondents CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. D. ANAND Present: Mr. V.K.JIndal, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. S.S.Mor, Senior Deputy Advocate General, Haryana. Mr. G.S.Sandhu, Advocate for respondent no.2. S. D. ANAND, J. Insofar as Naresh Gupta-petitioner is concerned, learned counsel for the petitioner states that petition may be dismissed as withdrawn, with liberty to raise all these pleas (and whatever other pleas available to them in the context) before the learned trial Court. Ordered accordingly. Insofar as Anita Rani-petitioner is concerned, I called upon the learned State Counsel as well as learned counsel for the complainant to invite my attention to any fact available on record to indicate any incriminating role on her part. The query draws a complete blank. All that learned State counsel states that she was a Director of the concern. However, he is not able to tell what role she performed in transfers of shares. In the light thereof, petition filed by Anita Rani shall stand allowed. The impugned FIR No. 7 dated 8.1.2006 under Sections 406, 419, 420, 467, 468 and 471 read with Section 120-B IPC qua Anita Rani- petitioner shall stand quashed. December 18, 2008 (S.D. ANAND) Pka JUDGE