In the High Court for the States of Pun jab and Haryana at Chandigarh. CRM.M 16583 of 2009 Decided on July 08,2009. Captain Rakesh Rihani -- Petitioner vs. State of Punjab --Respondent. Present: Mr.Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate,for the petitioner Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat,A.A.G.Punjab. Rakesh Kumar Jain, J: Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has filed this application for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him vide FIR No. 164 dated 06.4.2009 under Section 420 of I.P.C. at Police Station Kotwali, Patiala. In short, the allegations against the petitioner are that though admittedly he is not an Advocate, yet he posed himself to be an Advocate and induced the complainant to engage him to conduct his case in the High Court and charged Rs.35,000/-for that purpose. Before coming to this Court, the petitioner had filed bail application No.96 of 2009 before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala, which has been dismissed on 1.6.2009. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had appeared with Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal Advocate of this Court, who had filed C.W.P No. 10624 on 16.7.2007 which has been dismissed as withdrawn on 26.7.2007. It is, thus, contended that no offence is made out against the petitioner. On the other hand, learned State Counsel has argued that not CRM.M 16583 of 2009 -2- only the petitioner, who is admittedly not an Advocate had posed himself as an Advocate and took the case of the complainant as well as fee, but also he had got his name printed on the Vakalatnama filed in the writ petition as an associate of Mr.Ranjan Lakhanpal Advocate and his name appears in C.W.P.No.11667 of 2007, as an Advocate, for the complainant therefore, the act of cheating is writ large on the part of the petitioner. After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the view that the petitioner who is an imposter has induced and cheated innocent litigants like the petitioner who have no means to ascertain as to whether a person who is roaming around in Courts in the robes of an Advocate, is, in fact, an Advocate or not. Since the petitioner was introduced by his co-accused P.S.Kahlon as an Advocate of the High Court, the complainant had believed him and had handed over his case and amount of Rs.35,000/-. Thus, apparently, the petitioner is working as a tout in the District Courts and is a great threat to this pious and noble profession. In view of the seriousness of the offence, I do not find any extra ordinary circumstance to grant the petitioner anticipatory bail. Hence, the bail application is hereby dismissed. July 08,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge