Criminal Misc. No.M-31032 of 2011 -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Criminal Misc. No.M-31032 of 2011 Date of Decision : 7th November, 2011 Sukhdev Singh .... Petitioner Versus State of Punjab .... Respondent CORAM : HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE L. N. MITTAL. Present : Mr. Vivek K. Thakur, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Shilesh Gupta, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab. * * * * L.N.MITTAL, J. (ORAL) Sukhdev Singh accused has filed this application under Section 438 Code of Criminal Procedure (in short, the 'Cr. P. C.') for grant of anticipatory bail in the event of arrest in case FIR No. 158 dated 03.09.2011 under Sections 420/406 IPC registered at Police Station Kapurthala City, District Kapurthala. I have heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the case file. According to prosecution version, the petitioner and his co- accused received money from the complainant for sending the complainant to England. However, the complainant was sent to Hong Kong from where he was deported. The petitioner executed agreement to return the money to the complainant, but did not return the money. Learned counsel for the petitioner vehemently contended that money was not paid to the petitioner by the complainant. The Criminal Misc. No.M-31032 of 2011 -2- contention cannot be accepted. It was the petitioner who allegedly induced the complainant to pay money for going abroad. The allegation is that money was paid to all the accused. In any event, agreement to return the money to the complainant was allegedly executed by the petitioner, depicting his vital role in the occurrence. In view of the aforesaid, without meaning to express any opinion on merits of the case, I do not find it to be a fit case to extend the concession of anticipatory bail to the petitioner. Dismissed. ( L. N. MITTAL) JUDGE 7th November, 2011 'raj'