Punjab-Haryana High Court
Kanwaljeet Singh vs State Of Punjab on 1 August, 2023
PARVEEN KUMAR
2023.08.03 19:44
2023: PHHC:099327
CRM-M-37170-2023
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT
CHANDIGARH
CRM-M-37170-2023
Date of decision: 01.08.2023
KANWALJEET SINGH
...Petitioner
Versus
STATEOFPUNJAB ------------ Respondent
CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE HARNARESH SINGH GILL
Present:- Mr. Anoop Verma, Advocate,
for the petitioner.
HARNARESH SINGH GILL, J. (QRAL)
Through this petition, the petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in
case bearing FIR No.109 dated 22.10.2019, registered at Police Station
Bhikhiwind, District Tarn Taran, under Section 420 IPC.
Learned counsel for the petitioner contends that the alleged
transaction of Rs.65,000/- in the bank account of the petitioner was made
on 27.08.2018, but the above-noted FIR was registered on 22.10.2019 i.e.
after an unexplained delay of more than one year, and that there is no such
transaction on record. It is further submitted that the petitioner had neither
demanded nor received any amount from the complainant and that in fact,
the petitioner has never met the complainant.
Notice of motion.
On the asking of this Court, Mr. C.L.Pawar, Addl. A. G.
Punjab, accepts notice on behalf of the respondent-State, and submits that
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
PARVEEN KUMAR
2023.08.03 19:44
2023: PHHC:099327
CRM-M-37170-2023
the petitioner had cheated the complainant of Rs.2 lakh, on the pretext of
providing a job in the Food Department to him. It is further submitted that
during investigation, the petitioner admitted that he had received the money
from the complainant; that in pursuance of the compromise effected
between the parties, the petitioner agreed to make the payment of
Rs.85,000/-to the complainant on 01.05.2019, but he did not appear before
the Inquiry Officer and was again called on 05.06.2019. However in spite
of the assurance given by the petitioner even in writing, he did not make
the payment to the complainant. It is further submitted that from the very
beginning, the petitioner had an intention to cheat the complainant.
I have heard the learned counsel for the parties.
As per the prosecution version, the petitioner allured the
complainant by stating that he (petitioner) was serving as S.A. in Electricity
Board, Punjab, and he would arrange a govt. job in the Food Department
for the complainant. The complainant had also made the payment of Rs.2
lakh to the petitioner, as demanded by the latter for the said purpose. It is
also the case of the prosecution that despite having admitted the factum of
receipt of money, the petitioner had not returned the same.
Such type of cases are increasing day by day where innocent
job-seekers like the complainant are being allured and cheated on the
pretext of providing govt. job.
Keeping in view the serious allegations against the petitioner,
this Court finds that he is required for custodial interrogation to ascertain
the modus operandi of the alleged crime.
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
2023: PHHC:099327
CRM-M-37170-2023
In view of the above, this Court does not find any merit in the
present petition.
Dismissed.
01.08.2023 (HARNARESH SINGH GILL)
parveen kumar JUDGE
Whether reasoned/speaking? Yes/No
Whether reportable? Yes/No
PARVEEN KUMAR
2023.08.03 19:44
| attest to the accuracy and
authenticity of this order/judgment
