IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl.Misc.No.M-10565 of 2011 DATE OF DECISION: April 21, 2011 Satpal …..Petitioner versus State of Haryana .....Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr.Ravi Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner Mr.Vikas Malik, AAG, Haryana .. RAJAN GUPTA, J.: (Oral) This is a petition under section 438 Cr.P.C. seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner under section 420 IPC vide FIR No.23 dated 22.2.2011 at police station Gulha, District Kaithal. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. According to him, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is not required. He is, thus, entitled to pre-arrest bail. Learned State counsel has vehemently opposed the prayer for bail. According to him, petitioner is involved in two other cases of similar nature. He contends that petitioner and co-accused had promised to send son of the complainant to Italy. Instead, a visa for Peru was provided to the complainant. The complainant, however, asked the petitioner to return his money which he flatly refused. Crl.Misc.No.M-10565 of 2011 - 2 - Heard. It is evident that allegation against the petitioner is of having duped the complainant of Rs.4 lacs with the promise of sending his son abroad. It appears that instead of sending son of complainant abroad, some visa was provided to the complainant for a different country. In view of nature of allegations, I am of the considered view that petitioner is not entitled to pre- arrest bail. Dismissed. April 21, 2011 ( RAJAN GUPTA ) pc JUDGE 2