IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-23956 of 2008 Date of decision: January 29, 2009 Jai Thakur ….. Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ….. Respondent Present: Mr. G.S. Lalli, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Abhishek Chauala, AAG, Punjab. Mr. Rajvir Singh, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** S.S. SARON, J. This petition has been filed under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (“CrPC” – for short) seeking pre-arrest bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.40 dated 15.4.2008 registered at Police Section Nangal for the offence under Section 420 IPC. The complainant Gurbachan Singh (respondent No2) had entered into an agreement (Annexure P1) with the petitioner agreeing to receive a sum of Rs.1,10,000/- for sending his relative abroad. Neither the petitioner sent the relative of the complainant abroad nor he returned his (complainant’s) amount. Interim bail was granted to the petitioner vide order dated 23.9.2008. It was stated by the petitioner that he had returned a sum of Rs.40,000/- out of the loan amount and he was ready to return the remaining amount. The case was then taken up on 26.11.2008 on which date, learned counsel for the petitioner had submitted that he would pay the remaining amount of Rs.60,000/- within one and a half month. On request of the learned counsel for the petitioner, the complainant was also impleaded Crl. Misc. No. M-23956 of 2008 [2] as a party. Sh. Rajvir Singh, Advocate has put in appearance for the complainant (respondent No.2) and filed his Vakalatnama which is taken on record. It is stated by learned counsel for the complainant that he has received a cheque only of Rs.30,000/- out of the amount of loan that was taken by the petitioner and Rs.80,000/- is the remaining amount. The petitioner is not present and neither has the amount, that was agreed to be returned, been returned to the complainant within a period of one and a half month from 26.11.2008. In the circumstances, no ground for grant of pre-arrest bail to the petitioner is made out. Accordingly, the Crl. Misc. petition is dismissed. (S.S. SARON) JUDGE January 29, 2009 amit