IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.M.P(M) No. 738 of 2011. Date of decision: 29.9.2011. Rishi Kumar ….. Petitioner. Vs. State of H.P. …. Respondent. Coram The Hon’ble Mr. Justice Kuldip Singh, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 For the petitioner : Mr. Dheeraj Kumar Vashisth, Advocate. For the Respondent : Ms. Ruma Kaushik, Addl. Advocate General with Mr. R.P.Singh, Asstt. Advocate General. Kuldip Singh, Judge (oral). This is an application, under Section 439 Cr.P.C., for releasing the petitioner on bail in FIR No.112 of 2011 dated 30.7.2011, registered at Police Station, Amb, Distt. Una, under sections 420, 120-B IPC. The status report filed and the same has been perused. 2. It has been stated in the application that petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. The petitioner is innocent and has committed no offence. The petitioner had firstly filed bail application, under section 437 Cr.P.C., which was dismissed on 29.8.2011 by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Court No.1., Amb. The petitioner thereafter filed bail application, under section Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the Judgment? …2… 439 Cr.P.C. in the court of learned Addl. Sessions Judge, Una, which has also been dismissed on 8.9.2011. 3. The petitioner was arrested on 16.8.2011. The brother of the petitioner was also made an accused in the case, but he has been granted bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Amb on 14.8.2011. The allegations against the petitioner and his brother Shiv Kumar are identical, therefore, petitioner is also entitled to bail on the principle of parity. 4. It has been stated that no recovery is to be made from the petitioner. The father of the accused Ravi Dutt had returned a sum of Rs.2,85,000/- to the police out of alleged ill-gotten money. The petitioner had only deposited the amount in the accounts of a few persons and in the account of main accused Ravi Dutt on the request of main accused Ravi Dutt out of friendship and good faith. The petitioner is not beneficiary nor he duped anybody for receiving the alleged ill-gotten money. The petitioner is ready to furnish bail bonds in accordance with the directions of this court. The prayer has been made for releasing the petitioner on bail. 5. The bail application has been opposed on the basis of status report. It has been stated in the status report that on 30.7.2011 Harbans Lal and others submitted a written complaint alleging therein that petitioner had assured them that he would send them to foreign country Georgia on work visa. He obtained money from them. The petitioner prepared some fictitious documents and started sending the complainants in small groups to Delhi and had sent two persons Kuldip and Parvesh to Georgia, who were arrested …3… in Georgia at the airport and they were deported to India. Some complainants were kept at Delhi for about one and half month, at that time the complainants came to know that they have been duped. It has come in investigation that petitioner took Rs.43,90,000/- from 19 persons and gave some amount to his brother Shiv Kumar. Ravi Dutt friend of the petitioner is living in Georgia, who visited India in December 2010 and went back. Ravi Dutt and petitioner acted together and petitioner collected money from the persons. He deposited Rs.20,64,000/- in the account of Ravi Dutt and in the accounts of others as per the direction of Ravi Dutt. The petitioner was arrested on 16.8.2011, Shiv Kumar was arrested on 12.8.2011. It has been submitted that keeping in view the seriousness of the case, the petitioner is not entitled to bail. 6. I have heard both the sides and perused the police file. The allegations against the petitioner are that he in conspiracy with Ravi Dutt resident of Nehri Khalsa, Amb, who lives in Georgia took Rs.43,90,000/-from several persons by giving them false hope that he would send those persons to Georgia. It has been alleged that two persons were actually sent to Georgia on false and fabricated documents, who were arrested in Georgia and were deported to India. The investigating agency has come forward with the plea that out of the collected amount, the petitioner had transferred Rs.20,64,000/- in the account of Ravi Dutt and other accounts on the direction of Ravi Dutt. The petitioner has claimed bail on the principle of parity as his brother Shiv Kumar has been released on bail. The allegations against the petitioner are separate and serious and those …4… cannot be equated with the part attributed to Shiv Kumar. The petitioner has duped innocent people. There are allegations of preparing false documents. The petitioner is not entitled to indulgence of bail at this stage, accordingly application is dismissed. September 29, 2011. ( Kuldip Singh ) (Hem) Judge.