VIRANA PRABHUHAKKLADADDI Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The relief that has been sought in these proceedings under Article 226 of the Constitution, is the quashing of a First Information Report (FIR 327 of 2004) lodged on 13th November 2004 at the Economic Offences Wing, Police Station Sadar at Karnal, in the State of Haryana. The Third Respondent is the complainant.

(2.) Briefly stated, the allegation is that Sukhdev Singh, the son of the complainant and the complainant's grandsons, Alamjeet Singh and Bachitar Singh were desirous of obtaining visas for the U.S. and Canada. The aforesaid three persons are alleged to have met the Petitioner in New Delhi when the Petitioner is alleged to have represented that he would enable them to obtain visas for the aforesaid countries through his sister, Smt.Neha Dube, and brotherinlaw, represented to be based in England. The Petitioner was furnished with the details and addresses of the three persons. On 15th June 2001, it is alleged, the Petitioner came to the residence of the complainant at Karnal when an assurance was held out that the visas would be obtained against payment of money. An amount of Rs.10 lakhs each was allegedly demanded for obtaining the visas.

(3.) These proceedings were instituted in August 2005. By an interim order dated 21st September 2005, a Division Bench of this Court (Parkar and Mohta, JJ.) granted adinterim relief in terms of prayer clause (d) of the petition which reads as follows: