DEEPAK KUMAR Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks anticipatory bail in FIR No. 51 dated 01.03.2019 under Sections 420, 120-B IPC (Sections 465/467/468/471 IPC added later on) registered at Police Station City Faridkot, District Faridkot.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the petitioner had arranged the buses through different bus owners and they were paid their rent and other expenses. It is further submitted that on the complaint of Gurwinder Singh, an enquiry was conducted and it was found that a sum of Rs.22,62,050/- was transferred in the account of the petitioner and he could not produce any document regarding the payment of rent to the bus operators/owners. It is also submitted that the petitioner has placed on record the receipts/self declaration, Annexures P-4 to P-14 and affidavit Annexure P.15, showing that the amount stands paid to all the operators/owners, including the complainant and his partner.

(3.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has further stated that the present complaint on the basis of which the FIR had been registered, was filed after a delay of two years and not a single operator has ever raised any grievance against the petitioner.