IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc M- 28323 of 2010 Date of decision: 14.1.2011 Rajinder Singh and anr …Petitioners Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Present: Mr Vipin Mahajan, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr TS Salana, DAG Punjab. Mr Malkeet Singh, Advocate for the complainant. S.S.SARON, J. Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioners seek pre-arrest bail in a case registered against them on 4.8.2010 for the offence under Section 420 IPC. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint of Gurpreet Singh, Advocate. According to the complainant, the petitioners on 5.12.2009 came to his house and represented that they had started a new scheme, in terms of which if the complainant gave Rs 1.5 lakh then they would return double the amount within three months. They also represented that they would stand guarantee for the money; besides, the scheme was going to close on 31.12.2009. On 13.12.2009, Rajinder Singh (petitioner- 1) and his wife (petitioner-2) on telephone stated that they were coming to take the money. After sometime, the petitioners came to the house of the complainant and took Rs 1.5 lakh in cash. At that time, Harmeet Singh son of Dalbir Singh was present there. The petitioners had assured that double the amount would be given in March 2010. On 14.3.2010, when the Cr Misc M-28323 of 2010 2 complainant demanded his money, the petitioners said that the money would be paid within 10 days. After 10 days, the complainant was informed that the scheme had failed and his money and that of others has been lost and they could not return the money. On 17.4.2010, the complainant went to the house of the petitioners and demanded his money but the petitioners refused to return the same. It is submitted that the petitioners had taken Rs 1.5 lakh from the complainant with an intention to cheat him and for not returning his money. On the allegations, the SHO, Civil Lines, Amritsar on 4.8.2010 conducted an inquiry in which he came to the conclusion that the petitioners had cheated the complainant of Rs 1.5 lakh. According to the petitioners, no amount of the complainant was invested with the petitioners and the complainant does not have any receipt in this regard. The FIR according to the petitioners, is a counter-blast to the investment of Rs 5.80 lakhs made by the petitioners with the mother-in-law of the real sister of the complainant who is doing the committee business. It is when the petitioners demanded their money back which they had invested in the committee, that the present FIR has been registered against the petitioners. Learned counsel for the State and the complainant have submitted that the petitioners have clearly embezzled the amount and Harmeet Singh son of Dalbir Singh was present when the amount of Rs 1.5 lakh was given by the complainant to the petitioners at his house on 13.12.2009. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that there is no material on record to show as to whether an amount of Rs 1.5 lakh has been given by the complainant to the petitioners. There is no receipt in this regard also. Besides, no source has been Cr Misc M-28323 of 2010 3 mentioned by the complainant from where he got the money. According to the learned counsel for the complainant, the money was at his home only. However, that by itself at this stage cannot be said to be entirely correct. The stand of the petitioners that they had invested Rs 5.80 lakhs with the mother-in-law of the real sister of the complainant, who is doing the committee business, is a circumstance which would require to be gone into by the investigating authorities. The petitioners have joined the investigation; however, according to learned counsel for the State, the amount of Rs 1.5 lakhs has not been recovered. This in fact, is denied by the petitioners to have been received from the complainant. In the circumstances, the interim bail granted on 24.9.2010 is made absolute. This petition stands disposed of. 14.1.2011 ( S.S.SARON ) ASR Judge