Crl. Misc. No. M-17892 of 2010 (O&M) 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-17892 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: July 1, 2010 Raj Kumar @ Raju ........Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ........Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE SABINA Present: Mr. Sandeep S. Majithia, Advocate, for the petitioner. SABINA, J. Petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 of Code of Criminal Procedure for enlarging the petitioner on pre-arrest bail in case FIR No.42 dated 15.5.2010, under Section 420 of Indian Penal Code (in short 'IPC'), Police Station 'E' Divison, District- Amritsar. The contents of the FIR (Annexure P-1) reads as under :- “...........Sir, Requested that I, Tarsem s/o Kuldeep Raj r/o Street No.1,House No. 18 Vijay Nagar, Batala Road and my passport No. is H4542414. I wanted to go abroad. So I came in the contact of Raju s/o Buta Ram r/o Old Sabzi Mandi who told me to give me Rs.150000/- and I would send you to Malaysia and work permit would be arranged for two years from Delhi. On which I gave him Rs. 150000/-. At that time my younger brother namely Deepak was present alongwith me. I handed over him this money at his house. He Crl. Misc. No. M-17892 of 2010 (O&M) 2 took full responsibility to settle me abroad. But when I reached Malaysia neither I got any permit nor any work. I came back around after three months. There are more agents alongwith Raju in the city who deceived innocent people. Raju has defrauded me to the tune of Rs. 150000/-. I am very poor person. Please my money be got back from Raju. Sd/- Tarsem s/o Kuldeep Raj.” After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner, I am of the opinion that no ground for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner is made out. The allegations levelled against the petitioner are serious in nature. The petitioner has allegedly taken Rs.150000/- from the complainant on assurance that he will get a work permit for the complainant in Malaysia. However, the petitioner could not get work permit for the complainant nor the money, taken by the petitioner, has been returned. Custodial interrogation of the petitioner might be necessary. Dismissed. (SABINA) July 1, 2010 JUDGE Anand