Punjab-Haryana High Court
Balram Singh vs State Of Punjab on 30 November, 2022
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA
AT CHANDIGARH
208
Date of Decision: 30.11.2022
(i) CRM-M-44458-2022
Balram Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab and another .... Respondents
(ii) CRM-M-50423-2022
Jaspal Singh .... Petitioner
Versus
State of Punjab .... Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK KUMAR VERMA
Present: - Mr. Amandeep Singh Gulati, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM-M-44458-2022.
Mr. Janak Singh Bhinder, Advocate
for the petitioner in CRM-M-50423-2022.
Mr. Jaspal Singh Guru, Asstt. A.G., Punjab
for the respondent-State.
ASHOK KUMAR VERMA, J. (ORAL)
The petitioners have filed the present petitions under Section
438 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 for grant of anticipatory
bail in case FIR No.33 dated 13.05.2022 registered under Section 420 of
the Indian Penal Code, 1860 at Police Station Chamkaur Sahib, District
Rupnagar.
The above-said FIR was registered on the complaint made by
complainant-Sajjan Singh alleging that the petitioners along with
1 of 4
CRM-M-50423-2022
Manohar Lal and other co-accused have cheated him and others and
thereby dishonestly induced them to deliver Rs.90,000/- each in the year
2014-2015 on the pretext of returning the double amount after a short
period by their company known as 'Life Care Estate India Limited' but the
petitioners and their co-accused did not return any amount to the
complainant.
Learned counsel for the petitioners have argued that the
petitioners have been falsely implicated in the present case. Neither the
petitioners have cheated the complainant nor they have received any
amount from them by way of any dishonest inducement. The petitioners
are not a Director/Chairman of the company. Petitioner-Balram Singh is
doing the business of Commission Agent under the name and style of
'Life Care Group' and the said registered firm is managed by Manohar Lal
who is Managing Director of the said firm. Earlier, police of Police
Station Morinda found petitioner-Balram Singh innocent during the
inquiry conducted on the application moved by the complainant before
them but now the police of Police Station Chamkaur Sahib without going
through the real facts have falsely implicated him in the case. The present
FIR has been registered without any preliminary inquiry after a period of
more than 01 year which has not been explained by the prosecution.
Nothing has to be recovered from the petitioners and their custodial
interrogation are not required in the case. The petitioners are also ready
and willing to join investigation.
Per contra, learned State counsel opposed the present
2 of 4
CRM-M-50423-2022
petitions in terms of status report dated 07.11.2022 filed in CRM-M-
44458-2022 which is already taken on record. Learned State counsel
submits that the petitioners along with their co-accused have cheated the
complainant and others. The custodial interrogation of the petitioners are
required for thorough investigation of the case and for recovery of
embezzled amount.
I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners as well as the
learned State counsel and gone through the paper-book.
As per status report filed by the State, many other persons
have also moved similar complaints against the petitioners and their co-
accused to Senior Superintendent of Police, Rupnagar and all these
complaints were thoroughly inquired by Deputy Superintendent of Police
(PBI, Special Crime, EOW), Rupnagar and vide its report dated
31.05.2021, the Inquiry Officer concluded that petitioner-Balram Singh
and co-accused Manpreet Kaur were working as Branch Managers of
Branch Office of 'Life Care Estate India Ltd Company' at Chamkaur
Sahib whereas petitioner-Jaspal Singh working as employee in the said
company. The said company and its employees were persuading the
general public to invest in the company on the pretext of higher rate of
interest and complainant and several other persons of the area have
invested lacs of rupees in the above-said company. The petitioner-Balram
Singh and his employee collected huge amount by way of FDRs and
monthly installments from the complainant and other victims and when
the policies purchased by them got matured, then the petitioners and other
3 of 4
CRM-M-50423-2022
co-accused shut their office. During investigation, total 11 victims have
came forward and have approached the Investigating Officer and from the
calculation made by him so far, it has been revealed that the petitioners
and other co-accused have collected Rs.6,46,400/- from the poor people
like complainant. So far as 27 victims have been identified and out of
them 11 have been examined.
Having heard learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
view that the allegations against the petitioners are serious in nature. The
recovery of hefty amount is yet to be effected. Moreover, the
investigation is still going on, and therefore, their custodial interrogation
are necessary for finding out the modus operandi of commission of the
offence.
It is settled proposition of law that power exercisable under
Section 438 of the Cr.P.C. is somewhat extraordinary in character and it
is to be exercised in exceptional cases. This view of mine finds support
from the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in Madhya Pradesh Vs.
Pradeep Sharma, (2014) 2 SCC 171.
Keeping in view the above facts as well as nature of the
offence, the petitioners do not deserve the concession of anticipatory bail.
Hence, the present petitions are hereby dismissed.
30.11.2022 (ASHOK KUMAR VERMA)
kothiyal JUDGE
Whether speaking/reasoned Yes/No
Whether Reportable Yes/No
4 of 4
