SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Judgments of Supreme Court of India and High Courts

Shiv Kumar And Ors vs State Of Punjab on 15 October, 2019

CRM-M-42586-2019 -1-


Date of decision: 15.10.2019

Shiv Kumar and others
… Petitioners


State of Punjab
… Respondent


Present: Mr. Anil Chawla, Advocate
for the petitioners.

Mr. Joginder Pal Ratra, DAG, Punjab.

Mr. Gazi Mohd. Umair, Advocate
for the complainant.


Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail in FIR

No.032 dated 21.04.2018 under Section 406 IPC, registered at Police Station

Sadar Ahmedgarh, District Sangrur.

Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that as per allegations

in the FIR, registered at the instance of complainant Harjinder Singh, it is stated

that he is owner of a retail construction company and is also a contractor with

telecom company, wherein he has to lay wires underneath the earth and for this

purpose, he has employed labours. It is further stated in the FIR that accused

1 of 3
16-10-2019 23:47:22 :::
CRM-M-42586-2019 -2-

persons, after taking the amount, had failed to perform the work of laying the

wires and in that process, machinery like HDD machine, truck, motorcycle,

tractor and trolley etc. were taken by the accused persons and they have gone to

UP. It is further submitted that in fact, as per agreement between the petitioners

and complainant, the amount was entrusted to the petitioners and the work was

to be executed at Allahabad and therefore, no offence under Section 406 IPC is

made out, as it is primarily a civil dispute.

In reply, learned State counsel, on instructions from ASI Gorakh

Nath and assisted by learned counsel for the complainant, has opposed the

prayer for bail on the ground that the petitioners, on the pretext of performing

the work of laying the underground wires, have cheated the complainant and in

that process, they have taken Rs.2.00 lacs from the complainant along with the

machinery, which is detailed in the FIR. It is further submitted that the

petitioners, in order to avoid their liability towards the complainant, have

registered an FIR No.103 dated 06.11.2017 against the complainant in Police

Station Dadon, District Aligarh under Sections 323, Section504, Section506 IPC, which shows

intention of the petitioners that they never wanted to perform their part of the

contract and since the beginning, they had the intention to cheat the


After hearing learned counsel for the parties, finding that there are

serious allegations against the petitioners, who have not only taken the cash

from the complainant, but have also taken the machinery under the garb of an

agreement to lay the underground wires and rather, registered an FIR against

the complainant to deter him from recovering the amount, I find that custodial

interrogation of the petitioners is required.

2 of 3
16-10-2019 23:47:22 :::
CRM-M-42586-2019 -3-

In view of the above, finding no ground to grant anticipatory bail to

the petitioners, present petition is dismissed.

15.10.2019 JUDGE

Whether speaking/reasoned : Yes/No

Whether Reportable : Yes/No

3 of 3
16-10-2019 23:47:22 :::

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Copyright © 2021 SC and HC Judgments Online at MyNation

Free Legal Help, Just WhatsApp Away

MyNation HELP line

We are Not Lawyers, but No Lawyer will give you Advice like We do

Please read Group Rules – CLICK HERE, If You agree then Please Register CLICK HERE and after registration  JOIN WELCOME GROUP HERE

We handle Women Centric biased laws like False Sectioin 498A IPC, Domestic Violence(DV ACT), Divorce, Maintenance, Alimony, Child Custody, HMA 24, 125 CrPc, 307, 312, 313, 323, 354, 376, 377, 406, 420, 497, 506, 509; TEP, RTI and many more…

MyNation FoundationMyNation FoundationMyNation Foundation