In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-36331 of 2009 ..... Date of decision:12.1.2010 Kamal Kumar .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Harjinder Singh Dhillon, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. K.S. Sidhu, Deputy Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC at Police Station Haibowal, District Ludhiana. The FIR in the case has been registered on the complaint dated 15.7.2008 of Rakesh Kumar. It has been alleged by the complainant that he had given an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- about two years ago to the petitioner- Kamal Kumar and his brother Pawan Kumar for sending him to Taiwan. They had assured the complainant that he would be sent abroad to Taiwan. After two years they were not returning the money and when the complainant asked for return of the amount they had threatened him. The complainant had gone to the house of the accused for return of his amount but they beat him and threatened him. On the basis of the complaint, the SHO, Police Station Haibowal recommended for registration of case against Cr. Misc. No.M-36331 of 2009 [2] petitioner-Kamal Kumar and his brother Pawan Kumar for the offences under Sections 406 and 420 IPC. The matter was considered by the DSP, City-II, Ludhiana who gave his report to the effect that about 2½ to three years ago Kamal Kumar (petitioner) and Pawan Kumar had taken an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- from the complainant Rakesh Kumar for sending him to Taiwan. They through some other agent sent the complainant to Thailand. The agent after leaving the petitioner at Thailand went elsewhere. The complainant somehow came back to India and after coming back he approached Kamal Kumar and Pawan Kumar. Then their parents agreed to return the amount but did not give anything in writing. Pawan Kumar was lodged in jail in Pune in some case and Kamal Kumar (petitioner) was not present at his house and hence they could not be associated in the investigation. From the investigation carried out, it was found that Pawan Kumar and Kamal Kumar while taking an amount of Rs.2,20,000/- from the complainant for sending him abroad had cheated him. Accordingly, the case was recommended for registration of FIR for the offences under Sections 406, 420/120-B IPC. The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the allegations as made are absolutely false and anybody can be booked in this manner. Learned counsel for the State has submitted that the matter was inquired into before registration of FIR and thereafter on finding some truth, the FIR has been registered. It is submitted that Surinder Singh has deposed an affidavit on 5.11.2009 to the effect that he had given an amount of Rs.1,80,000/- to the complainant. The complainant has deposed an affidavit dated 5.11.2009 to the effect that he had taken an amount of Cr. Misc. No.M-36331 of 2009 [3] Rs.1,80,000/- from Surinder Singh which he had agreed to repay within four months. Learned counsel for the petitioner, however, has submitted that the said affidavits are an afterthought as this was the ground taken by the petitioner in his application for bail before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Be that as it may, it is a matter regarding the taking of amount of Rs.2,20,000/- from the complainant on the pretext of sending the complainant to Taiwan and instead sent him to Thailand. The case is to be inquired into by the Police. The present is not a case which would entitle the petitioner to the concession of pre-arrest bail. In a case where pre-arrest bail is sought the advantage of custodial interrogation of eliciting more information and material which may be useful is to be kept in view. Besides, the exercise of power to grant pre-arrest bail is somewhat extra-ordinary in character. In the facts and circumstances, no ground for pre-arrest bail is made out. The criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. January 12, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*