IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc 33645-46 of 2010 and Criminal Misc M-16094 of 2010 Date of decision: 26.7.2010 Sampuran Singh …Petitioner Versus State of Punjab …Respondent Present: Mr GS Punia, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr TS Salana, DAG Punjab. S.S.SARON, J. Cr Misc 33645-46 of 2010 The correct translation of the FIR dated 30.1.2010 attached with this application is taken on record, subject to just exceptions This application stands disposed of. Cr Misc M-16094 of 2010 Heard counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks regular bail in a case registered against him for the offence under Section 420 IPC. The petitioner is in custody since 18.3.2010. The FIR in the case has been registered on the statement of Jasparkash Singh son of Charanjit Singh, who has alleged that his brother Nirmal Singh had gone to Malaysia as a tourist in the year 2006. There he met one Surjit Kaur @ Manjit Kaur. She represented that she had been working in the Embassy and would send him (Nirmal Singh) to Germany and that she would take the expenses on his reaching there. She also Criminal Misc 33645-46 of 2010 and Criminal Misc M-16094 of 2010 2 informed that she belonged to the same village as Nirmal Singh and she would not commit any fraud. Besides, her father-in-law – Sampuran Singh (petitioner) was a resident of village Ghalib Ran Singh, Tehsil Jagraon, District Ludhiana and they could contact him. She stated that a sum of Rs 7,00,000/- would be the expenses per head. The deal was thus settled. Manjit Kaur took the Passport of Nirmal Singh and brought him to her parental house and demanded the first payment. The complainant – Jasparkash Singh send Rs 2,00,000/-. After three months, she got a duplicate visa issued for Poland from Malaysia and stated that the balance amount of Rs 5,00,000/- be paid to Sampuran Singh (petitioner). The complainant paid a sum of Rs 5,00,000/- to the petitioner by executing a writing. Thereafter, Nirmal Singh was sent back to India from Thailand as he had a duplicate visa. When Nirmal Singh returned, he demanded the money from Sampuran Singh (petitioner). The latter flatly refused and threatened that he would initiate action. In this manner, the petitioner, Manjit Kaur and her daughter – Rabbi and son Baldev Singh had committed a fraud on the pretext of sending Nirmal Singh abroad. They have committed a fraud with many boys. The case is triable by a Magistrate of first class. The trial in the case is likely to take time. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that Manjit Kaur is not the daughter-in-law of Sampuran Singh (petitioner). A reference has been made to the voter list of halqa Jagraon wherein Manjit Kaur is stated to be the wife of Jugraj Singh. Said Jugraj Singh is recorded as son of Mukhtiar Singh in the voter list of polling area, Jagraon. Criminal Misc 33645-46 of 2010 and Criminal Misc M-16094 of 2010 3 The prosecution is to establish its case by leading evidence. The trial in the case is likely to take time, In the facts and circumstances, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the petitioner further incarcerated. This petition is allowed. The petitioner, on his furnishing personal bond and surety to the satisfaction of the learned trial Court, shall be admitted to bail. 26.7.2010 ( S.S.SARON ) ASR Judge