Crl.M.No.M-17096 of 2011(O&M) -1- IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl.M.No.M-17096 of 2011(O&M) Date of Decision: May 31, 2011 Jagroop Singh .....Petitioner v. State of Punjab .....Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE RAM CHAND GUPTA Present: Mr.Anant Kataria, Advocate for the petitioner. ..... RAM CHAND GUPTA, J.(Oral) Crl.M.No.30698 of 2011 Application is allowed subject to all just exceptions. Crl.M.No.M-17096 of 2011 The present petition filed under Section 438 Cr.P.C. is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case FIR No.20, dated 13.2.2011, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120-B IPC, registered at Police Station Jamalpur, Ludhiana. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioner and have gone through the whole record carefully, including the impugned order passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ludhiana, vide which application filed on behalf of the present petitioner for anticipatory bail was dismissed. Brief allegations against petitioner-accused are that he entered into an agreement to sell a plot with complainant -Lukas and obtained `65,000/- from him as earnest money and the balance amount was to be paid on or before 12.9.2010 and, however, the said plot was not owned by Crl.M.No.M-17096 of 2011(O&M) -2- him and rather the same was owned by Smt.Harpreet Kaur. Hence, allegations against petitioner-accused are that he entered into an agreement to sell the property belonging to one Smt.Harpreet Kaur and obtained `65,000/- as earnest money by cheating from the complainant. It has been contended by learned counsel for the petitioner- accused that lateron Harpreet Kaur executed sale deed in favour of complainant and the present FIR was lodged after execution of the said sale deed. However, the fact remains that petitioner extracted `65,000/- from complainant by way of executing agreement to sell of the property, which does not belong to him and the said amount is yet to be recovered from him. Hence, it is not such a case in which extraordinary relief of anticipatory bail should be granted to the petitioner-accused. Hence, in view of these facts, and without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the present petition filed by petitioner- Jagroop Singh for grant of anticipatory bail is, hereby, dismissed being devoid of any merit. 31.5.2011 (Ram Chand Gupta) meenu Judge