Crl. Misc No. M-23617 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc No. M-23617 of 2009 Date of decision : 11.09.2009 Vivek Sharma ....Petitioner V/s State of Punjab ....Respondent BEFORE : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. Sudhir Sharma, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG Punjab. RAJAN GUPTA J. (ORAL) This is a petition for grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered against the petitioner under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC vide FIR No. 276 dated 10.07.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that petitioner is not involved in any manner and has been falsely implicated in the instant case. According to the counsel, from the allegations levelled in the FIR, no offence is made out against the petitioner. Learned counsel submits that petitioner was not arrested from the spot and has been arraigned as an accused merely on the basis of suspicion. Learned counsel for the State has, however, opposed the grant of bail on the ground that there are clear cut allegations against the petitioner. According to the counsel, the petitioner prepares fake RC's and driving licenses after charging money from innocent people. According to the counsel, petitioner is involved in another case of similar nature in which Crl. Misc No. M-23617 of 2009 2 investigation is still pending. Learned counsel has submitted that custodial interrogation of the petitioner is necessary for taking the investigation to its logical end. I have heard counsel for the parties and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It is evident that allegation against the petitioner is that he was was working as agent outside DTO office and duping number of innocent people by charging exorbitant fee in connivance with the officials of DTO office. He is alleged to be preparing RC's and driving licenses by forging signatures of DTO. Keeping in view the nature of the allegations against the petitioner and gravity of offence and also the fact that his custodial interrogation may be necessary, I do not deem it a fit case for grant of concession of anticipatory bail. Hence, the petition is dismissed being devoid of merit. 11.09.2009 (RAJAN GUPTA) Ajay JUDGE