In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... (1) Criminal Misc. Nos.49912 & 13 of 2010 and Criminal Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:22.9.2010 Nirmal Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... (2) Criminal Misc. No.M-26376 of 2010 ..... Jasdeep Kaur .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, Advocate for the petitioners. Mr. T.S. Salana, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. Puneet Sharma, Advocate for the applicant-complainant. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Cr. Misc. No.49913 of 2010: Notice of the criminal miscellaneous to counsel for the petitioner. Mr. G.S. Sandhawalia, learned counsel for the petitioner accepts notice. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that he has no objection in case Harmeet Singh-complainant is impleaded as respondent Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [2] No.2. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous application is allowed as prayed for. Cr. Misc. No.49912 of 2010: The statement (Annexure-R.2/1) of Jaswant Singh (PW-2), statement (Annexure-R.2/2) of Harmeet Singh (PW-3), statement (Annexure-R.2/3) of ASI Jit Lal (PW-5) and Farad as to recovery of passport (Annexure-R.2/4) attached with the criminal miscellaneous application are taken on record subject to just exceptions. The criminal miscellaneous stands disposed of. Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010: Cr. Misc. No.M-26376 of 2010: Heard learned counsel for the parties. This order will dispose of Criminal Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 filed by Nirmal Singh and Criminal Misc. No.M-26376 of 2010 filed by his wife Jasdeep Kaur. The petitioners in the respective petitions seek regular bail in case FIR No.165 dated 8.6.2009 registered against them at Police Station City, Kapurthala for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint made by Harmeet Singh (respondent No.2) who has alleged that he was an unemployed youth and had decided to go abroad. He was in search of a good travel agent and he happened to meet Joginder Ram Lambardar resident of Naseerpur who was known to him earlier. The complainant talked with Joginder Ram Lambardar about his plans to go abroad. Joginder Ram informed him that Nirmal Singh (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No.M- Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [3] 20670 of 2010) and his wife Jasdeep Kaur (petitioner in Criminal Misc. No.M-26376 of 2010) are residents of Delhi and had met him (Joginder Ram) and informed him that they send persons abroad. They would have a meeting with them. The complainant along with Joginder Ram went to the Court premises at Kapurthala on 26.9.2007 and Joginder Ram introduced the complainant with Nirmal Singh (petitioner) and his family. The complainant was asked to reach Ramneek Hotel and they would discuss the matter. The complainant then met the petitioner at Ramneek Hotel who gave the residential address at Delhi and also informed him that the petitioner was President of Azadpur Sabzi Mandi, New Delhi. His son Harvinder Singh alias Rubal was residing in America and on arrival of persons sent to America he takes care of them and arranges for their employment/placement. The petitioner also informed the complainant that they do the work of getting VISA in No.1 and arrange for work permit for a period of at least two years. The petitioner then showed the complainant VISAs pasted on the passport and further informed that the said persons were ready. It was also informed that an expenditure of `20 Lacs would be there. The petitioner further informed that he had acquaintances in the Embassy and he promised to come again on 19.10.2007. As per their promise both of them i.e. Nirmal Singh and his wife Jasdeep Kaur reached Ramneek Hotel on 19.10.2007. The complainant along with his broker (Arhtia) Jaswant Singh and Lambardar Joginder Ram reached Ramneek Hotel. The complainant gave his passport along with `3 Lacs to Nirmal Singh which was handed over by the latter to his wife who put his money and passport in her personal bag. The complainant was asked to keep the Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [4] remaining amount ready. He was also given the mobile number of the petitioner and his wife. The complainant then received a phone call from Nirmal Singh who informed him that his work is being done expeditiously and they were coming on 29.10.2007. The complainant should keep the money ready. The complainant arranged `4 Lacs from his Arhtia Jaswant Singh which he gave to Nirmal Singh and his wife at Kapurthala on 29.10.2007. The complainant took the petitioners Nirmal Singh and Jasdeep Kaur to the shop of Jaswant Singh Arhtia at Dana Mandi, Kapurthala and got delivered a sum of `4 Lacs from Arhtia to them. At that time Jaswinder Singh Sarpanch resident of Dulowal had also come there by chance for his personal work. The complainant was told that he should reach the residence of the petitioners in Delhi and deliver the balance amount there. The complainant received a phone call then he along with Joginder Ram Lambardar reached the residence of Nirmal Singh petitioner at Lawrence Road Keshavpur. Nirmal Singh and his wife Jasdeep Kaur did not meet them there in the house. Their daughters Parul and Payal met them. They arranged a talk on phone with their father and mother and who told them that they had gone to some other place and whatever amount they had brought with them, they should deliver it to their daughter Payal. Their work, it was stated, is ready and they should remain ready. Then the complainant gave `7 Lacs to the daughter of the petitioners, namely, Payal, who made bundles of currency notes after counting it and kept it with her. She further said that they should not worry as the work was ready and her parents had gone to some work for them. The complainant and Joginder Ram then came back. After this the complainant continued waiting for the Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [5] phone call from Nirmal Singh but he did not contact the complainant. Even his phone calls were disconnected. The complainant made several rounds to the residence of the petitioners at Delhi but they were not available at their house. Whenever they met them, they made several excuses. Then the complainant inquired from Azadpur Sabzi Mandi and he was surprised to know that there was no person by the name of Nirmal Singh who was President of the Mandi. After knowing this, the doubts of the complainant increased further and being aggrieved he started quarreling with the petitioners at their residence and their neighbours also assembled there. On this, the petitioners-Nirmal Singh and Jasdeep Kaur told the complainant that they had to come Kapurthala on 25.3.2008 and in case his work was not done till that date/time, then they would return the money. With this assurance, the complainant came back to his village. On reaching his village, he collected more information about the petitioners. Then the complainant came to know that the petitioners had cheated many others in the name of travel agency and defrauded them. On 25.3.2008, the complainant waited for the petitioners in the Court premises along with his companions, then at about 11.00 a.m. Nirmal Singh came in the Court and they inquired from him. He then made several excuses. When the complainant behaved harshly, then he gave a cheque of `14 Lacs of ICICI Bank account at Punjab Bagh Branch, New Delhi bearing cheque No.342081 dated 25.3.2008. The complainant deposited the cheque in his bank account but on presentation it was not honoured due to insufficient funds. In this manner, it was alleged that fraud had been committed with the complainant. Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [6] complainant Harmeet Singh in fact is a frontman of Capt. Harminder Singh. It is submitted that petitioner Nirmal Singh and his wife Jasdeep Kaur were joint partners and subscribers with Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh. A reference has been made to the certificate of incorporation dated 25.5.2007 (Annexure-P.3) wherein it has been certified that Euro Green Malls Private Limited has been incorporated under the Companies Act, 1956. The petitioners Nirmal Singh and Jasdeep Kaur are subscribers of M/s Euro Green Malls Private Limited along with Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh. It is submitted that disputes arose between the petitioners and Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh. Nirmal Singh-petitioner filed a civil suit dated 4.7.2008 (Annexure-P.4) for permanent injunction against Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh praying for restraining Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh as also their associates and agents from forcibly and illegally dispossessing the plaintiff Nirmal Singh from the suit property. It was submitted that Karanveer Singh son of Capt. Harminder Singh had lodged FIR No.408 dated 6.11.2008 (Annexure-P.6) for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC against the petitioners Nirmal Singh and Jasdeep Kaur which is with respect to the Euro Green Malls Private Limited. It is further submitted that another FIR No.238 dated 25.11.2009 (Annexure-P.9) for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC is registered against the petitioner Nirmal Singh at Police Station Sadar Phagwara on the complaint of Harminder Singh. In the said case, statement (Annexure-P.8) of Harmeet Singh-the present complainant was recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C. on 23.12.2009. In his said statement (Annexure- Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [7] P.8) Harmeet Singh had stated that he is doing the work of supervision of Capt. Harmohinder Singh resident of 19, Cool Road, Jalandhar. On 23.12.2009, Harmeet Singh (complainant) along with Mandeep Singh, HC, Economic Offences Wing, Kapurthala went to the office of Indo-Arian Transport Centre Limited, 141, Rohtak Road, New Delhi wherein TDS Manager Onkar Chand Aggarwal handed over statement of payments in his presence in respect of M/s Euro Green Malls Private Limited for the year 2008-09. According to the learned counsel for the petitioners, the said statement clearly shows that Harmeet Singh-the complainant in the present case is a frontman of Capt. Harminder Singh, inasmuch as, he has stated that he is doing the work of supervision of Captain Harminder Singh. Therefore, the petitioners have been involved and implicated in the present case by Capt. Harminder Singh and his son Karanveer Singh through the complainant Harmeet Singh who works for them. In any case, it is submitted that the petitioner Nirmal Singh was arrested on 10.6.2009. The charges in the case were framed on 19.9.2009. Jasdeep Kaur wife of Nirmal Singh could not be arrested. She was initially granted anticipatory bail which was dismissed for non-prosecution on 28.4.2010 but was restored on 5.5.2010. She was, however, arrested on 18.5.2010. Jasdeep Kaur is petitioner in the connected case i.e. Criminal Misc. No.M-26376 of 2010. After her arrest the charges have been re-framed on 15.7.2010. The prosecution, it is submitted, has examined only one witness after charges have been re-framed and the trial in the case would take time. In response, learned counsel for the State and the complainant have submitted that the petitioners have indulged in cheating of `14 Lacs from an innocent person, namely, Harmeet Singh; and the petitioners Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [8] Nirmal Singh had given a cheque of `14 Lacs to Harmeet Singh which was not honoured. The giving of the cheque, it is submitted, clearly shows that the amount was due from the petitioners to the complainant. The cheque, it is submitted, was produced by the complainant during his examination in the Court. It is submitted that the statement (Annexure-P.8) of the complainant Harmeet Singh in FIR No.238 dated 25.11.2009 (Annexure- P.9) is under Section 161 Cr.P.C. and on the basis of the said statement it cannot be said that the complainant is doing the work of supervision of Capt. Harminder Singh. A reference has been made to the cross- examination (Annexure-R.2/2) of the complainant in the present case in which it is inter alia stated that he has not worked under Capt. Harminder Singh and he is a sub-contractor of Jatin who belongs to Amritsar. The complainant has sub-contract of house keeping at Udhampur and also at Jalandhar. He has no other sub-contractorship apart from house keeping. It is merely stated that he knows Capt. Harminder Singh. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the allegations against the petitioners are indeed serious, inasmuch as, they are alleged to have taken `14 Lacs from the complainant Harmeet Singh. However, it is to be established and gone into by the trial Court as to whether Harmeet Singh is frontman of Capt. Harminder Singh with whom the petitioners have a dispute with respect to their business dealings. Harmeet Singh in his statement (Annexure-P.8) in another FIR i.e. FIR No.238 dated 25.11.2009 (Annexure-P.9) admits that he has been doing the supervision work of Capt. Harminder Singh. The petitioners were joint subscribers of M/s Euro Green Malls Private Limited with Capt. Harminder Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [9] Singh and his son Karanveer Singh and certificate of incorporation (Annexure-P.3) is on record. In the cross-examination (Annexure-R.2/2) he has stated that he does work of supervision for Capt. Harminder Singh. In any case, the complainant accepts that he knows Capt. Harminder Singh. Therefore, at this stage, the evidentiary value of the statement (Annexure- P.8) is not to be gone into and it can be said that the complainant Harmeet Singh has been known to Capt. Harminder Singh and there is a business dispute between the petitioners and Capt. Harminder Singh. Therefore, the possibility of the petitioners being falsely implicated cannot be ruled out. Besides, it can also be inferred that the petitioner Nirmal Singh was not a total stranger to the complainant. The complainant has alleged that he met the petitioner Nirmal Singh for the first time at the District Courts, Kapurthala through Joginder Ram Lambardar whereas if he was known to Capt. Harminder Singh then he would have known the petitioners as they had joint business with Harminder Singh. These aspects, however, are to be considered and gone into after evidence has been led. The case is triable by a Magistrate of the Ist Class. The trial in the case is likely to take time. The prosecution is to establish and prove its case in accordance with law. In the facts and circumstances, the petitioners on their furnishing personal bonds and surety each to the satisfaction of the trial Magistrate shall be admitted to bail. The petitioners, however, shall not leave the country without the permission of the trial Court and they shall surrender their passports before the trial Court. Nothing stated or observed herein shall be taken as an expression of opinion on the merit of the case and the learned trial Court shall consider and decide the case on the basis of evidence and material as produced before it and uninfluenced by any Cr. Misc. No.M-20670 of 2010 [10] observations made herein. The criminal miscellaneous petitions stand disposed of. September 22, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*