Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1001 of 2008 14.10.2008 Present: Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Rajinder Dogra, Addl. A.G. for the respondent. Cr.M.P.(M) No. 1001 of 2008: This is an application under Section 438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for granting anticipatory bail to the petitioner in case F.I.R. No. 574 of 2007 dated 10.10.2007 registered at Police Station, Kullu, District Kullu, H.P. under Sections 420, 468, 405 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The status report has been filed by the respondent- State. Heard and perused the record. Mr. Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate has strenuously argued that the petitioner is an innocent and has been falsely implicated by the police. He then argued that the petitioner has purchased shares in his individual capacity as Managing Director of the Company as well as in the name of his wife. He has strongly relied upon the progress report made by the Managing Director of the Company. The learned Additional Advocate General has opposed the bail application. He strenuously argued that the petitioner and other co-accused had defrauded the public of their money by embezzling/mis-appropriating the amount received by him. He further contended that the petitioner has not produced the original record. It has come in the record that the petitioner and the co-accused-Mr Veer Singh Mehta had collected a sum of Rs. 5,16,05,646/- from the public at large. This money has not been accounted for by the petitioner. The money received was required to go into the funds of the company. The petitioner has failed prima facie to establish that how a sum of Rs. 5,16,05,646/- received from the public has been utilised. The report strongly relied upon by Mr. B.S. Chauhan, Advocate will not be of any help to him since according to the learned Additional Advocate General, the report has been signed by a person, who was removed long back as Managing Director of the Company. The money has been received from the persons by assuring them that they shall be offered appointment in the company or their amount will multiply many folds as per the submissions made by the learned Additional Advocate General. It is a serious matter. The money received ought to have been entered in the Account Books of the company and if the share certificates were issued, their record was to be kept intact. This Court will not throttle the investigation which is at the thresh- hold. The Court has to ensure that the persons are not duped by the persons like the petitioner. Consequently, there is no merit in this application and the same is rejected. The observations made in this order are for the disposal of this application and these shall not be treated as an expression/opinion on the merits of the case. Copy ‘Dasti’ on usual terms. (Rajiv Sharma), J. October 14, 2008. (cr)