In the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh ...... Criminal Misc. No.M-20499 of 2010 ..... Date of decision:20.7.2010 Daljit Singh son of Surjit Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent .... Present: Mr. Harchand Singh Batth, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... S.S. Saron, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner. The petitioner-Daljit Singh son of Surjit Singh seeks pre-arrest bail in a case registered against him for the offence under Section 420 IPC on the statement of Daljit Singh son of Lachhman Singh. It is alleged by the complainant that he was known to the petitioner and he was got allured by him for going to South Africa and getting him a job there. The petitioner stated that the complainant would get Rs.3 Lacs. On 12.2.2006, the complainant paid Rs.3 Lacs but the petitioner had sent the complainant illegally due to which he came back. Thereafter, the complainant demanded his money back and the petitioner accepted that he would pay Rs.1.5 Lacs. For the said amount the petitioner gave two cheques of Rs.40,000/- each and two cheques of Rs.35,000/- each. When the first of these cheques was submitted to Gramin Bank for realization it was transpired that there was no money in the account of the petitioner. Accordingly, the FIR has been registered. Cr. Misc. No.M-20499 of 2010 [2] According to the petitioner, the son of the petitioner, namely, Harmandeep Singh and the complainant went abroad through some agent. Later on the complainant committed a theft in South Africa and due to this he was deported from there. The complainant, it is submitted, got suspicious that it was the son of the petitioner who was involved for naming the complainant for that theft. Due to said grudge the complainant had named the petitioner and his two sons Harmandeep Singh and Amandeep Singh in the FIR. It is also submitted that the complainant has a remedy of filing the complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act and the FIR is not maintainable. After giving my thoughtful consideration to the matter, it may be noticed that the fact that the petitioner had given two cheques of Rs.40,000/- each and two cheques of Rs.35,000/- each, the first of which on presentation was not honoured, it is quite evident that the petitioner had given the money as refund for the amount he had taken for sending the complainant abroad. There is no material to show that Harmandeep Singh son of the petitioner had also gone along with the complainant. Besides, the allegations of theft having been committed by the complainant and his being deported from South Africa, if any, is in the nature of defence which is not to be gone into at this stage. In view of the afore-noticed facts and circumstances, no ground for grant of pre-arrest bail is made out. Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous petition is dismissed. July 20, 2010. (S.S. Saron) Judge *hsp*