CRM No. M-26394 of 2008 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-26394 of 2008 (O&M) Date of decision: 27.07.2009 Amarjit Kaur ...Petitioner Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. K.K. Saini, Advocate, for the petitioner. Mr. Shailesh Gupta, DAG, Punjab. Rajan Gupta, J. This is a petition seeking pre-arrest bail in a case registered against the petitioner, under Sections 409 and 420 IPC, at Police Station Machhiwara, Police District Khanna, vide FIR No.86 dated 12th August, 2008. The allegation in the FIR is that the petitioner, who is Ex- Sarpanch, Gram Panchayat, Behlolpur, had withdrawn a sum of Rs.2.45 lacs from the account of the Gram Panchayat and embezzled the same. Learned counsel for the petitioner has argued that the petitioner has been falsely implicated. The funds used by the petitioner during her tenure has been shown in account books as per rules and regulations. He has further submitted that during the process of work in the village, Shri Raghbir Singh, Gram Sewak always compelled the petitioner to issue and sign the cheques for withdrawal of amount from the bank for paying the wages to the labourers. The petitioner has not embezzled any amount and as such, she deserves the concession of CRM No. M-26394 of 2008 2 anticipatory bail. Learned counsel for the State has opposed the prayer for anticipatory bail on the ground that the allegations against the petitioner are serious in nature as she has embezzled a huge amount of the Gram Panchayat. According to the counsel, custodial interrogation of the petitioner is required for taking the investigation to its logical end. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and given careful thought to the facts of the case. It is evident from a perusal of the FIR that the petitioner had withdrawn an amount of Rs.2.45 lacs from the account of the Gram Panchayat Behlolpur. In this regard, Shri Raghbir Singh, Gram Sewak had written to the office of District Development and Panchayat Officer on 15th July, 2008. The D.D.P.O. had served notice dated 16th July, 2008 to the petitioner to explain her position but she had neither deposited the said amount nor submitted any reply to the said notice. There is nothing to show at this stage that the petitioner has been falsely implicated in the case. In view of the fact that the petitioner is alleged to have defrauded the Gram Panchayat of a heavy amount, during her tenure as Sarpanch, I find no ground to extend the concession of anticipatory bail. There is no merit in this petition. The same is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE August 27, 2009 'rajpal'