In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-5448 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:27.9.2010 Gurinder Kaur .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab and another .....Respondents .... Present: Mr. M.S. Cheema, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. V.P.S. Sidhu, Assistant Advocate General, Punjab for the respondent-State. Mr. Abhijat Gaur, Advocate for Ms. G.K. Mann, Advocate for the complainant. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the parties. The petitioner Gurinder Kaur seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against her for the offence under Section 420 IPC. The FIR has been registered on the complaint of Birinder Singh. It is alleged by the complainant that in order to go abroad to Canada, he approached the owner of M/s G.K. Enterprises , Sector 34-A, Chandigarh of which Smt. Gurinder Kaur (petitioner) and her husband Naveen Kumar were contacted. They told the complainant that they had sent number of persons to other countries. They asked to make payment of `5 Lacs in the first instance and thereafter to pay `5 Lacs. Rest of the amount of `4 Lacs was to be taken after VISA was granted. The complainant paid an amount of `5 Lacs on 11.6.2008 to the petitioner and Cr. Misc. No.M-5448 of 2010 [2] her husband Naveen Kumar. He also gave photo copy of his passport and 10 passport size photographs in the presence of Harvir Singh. The said amount was taken by the petitioner and Naveen Kumar. Thereafter, the complainant was neither sent abroad nor the money returned. Learned counsel for the petitioner has contended that the case is a counter-blast to FIR No.597 dated 30.10.2009 (Annexure-P.1) filed by Naveen Kumar husband of the petitioner Gurinder Kaur at Police Station, Sector 34, Chandigarh against Prabhjeet Singh and his wife Smt. Baljodh Dhadhli. According to the learned counsel, Naveen Kumar had paid an amount of `50 Lacs for the purchase of land measuring 75 Kanals 10 Marlas at Village Hedon, Tehsil Samrala, District Ludhiana which was jointly owned by Prabhjeet Singh and his mother Tejinder Kaur. An agreement to sell was executed between Naveen Kumar and Prabhjeet Singh. The latter had assured that he would get the agreement signed by his mother Smt. Tejinder Kaur on her return from abroad. However, after her return the land was sold to one Rajiv Kumar. Prabhjeet Singh after negotiations had agreed to return the amount and he gave a cheque of `5,10,000/- in favour of Naveen Kumar. Another cheque for an amount of `67,90,000/- was given by Smt. Baljodh Dhadhli, wife of Prabhjeet Singh. The said amount was towards the refund of the earnest money and also for settling all the claims. However, both the cheques were dishonoured and Naveen Kumar has filed criminal complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Prabhjeet Singh and Baljodh Dhadhli. It is submitted that the petitioner is being implicated only because of the dispute between her husband Naveen Kumar and Smt. Tejinder Kaur mother Cr. Misc. No.M-5448 of 2010 [3] of Prabhjeet Singh. It is also submitted that Tejinder Kaur has also lodged FIR No.242 dated 2.12.2009 (Annexure-P.2) against Naveen Kumar. The petitioner was granted pre-arrest bail in the said case by the learned Sessions Judge, Ludhiana. Thereafter, the present case has been registered. The husband of the petitioner, namely, Naveen Kumar was arrested in the said case (Annexure-P.2) and was granted regular bail by the learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Ludhiana on 10.2.2010. According to the learned counsel for the State an amount of `5 Lacs is to be recovered. It may be noticed that there are allegations by the petitioner that the FIR has been registered on account of the fact that her husband Naveen Kumar is having litigation with Prabhjeet Singh and his mother Smt. Tejinder Kaur. Smt. Tejinder Kaur is stated to be the widow of former MLA and according to the petitioner she exercises considerable influence on the Police. Keeping in view the previous dispute as also the fact that she was granted pre-arrest bail by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana in an earlier case; besides, she is a lady, it would be just and expedient to confirm the interim bail granted to her on 24.2.2010. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is allowed and the interim bail granted on 24.2.2010 is made absolute. September 27, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*