SURINDER PAL Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner seeks grant of anticipatory bail in a case registered vide FIR No.01 dated 2.1.2021 under Sections 406/420/120-B IPC and Section 13 of Punjab Travel Professionals (Regulation) Act, 2014 and Section 24 of Immigration Act at Police Station City Balachaur, District Shaheed Bhagat Singh Nagar.

(2.) The FIR in question was lodged at the instance of Amrit Singh wherein it is alleged that Sanjeev Kumar son of Surinderpal had studied with him in college and he knew him well and Sanjeev used to frequently visit him in his house. Later, he started business of sending people abroad. The complainant was also interested in going to Canada. In May, 2019 Sanjeev Kumar came to complainant's house and represented that he could send him to Canada and could arrange for a work permit which would cost him Rs. 20 lacs. The complainant informed him that his sister Sumanjeet Kaur resides in Canada and had applied for taking him to Canada but his application stands declined. Sanjeev Kumar assured the complainant that despite refusal, he could still manage to send him abroad for an amount of Rs. 20 lacs. The complainant alleged that Sanjeev Kumar assured him that since his father Surinderpal is a government employee, the complainant should not have any reason to worry. It is alleged that a few days thereafter, Sanjeev Kumar sent a message on Whatsapp that he was going to Spain and asked the complainant to meet him there but the complainant did not go there. Later, Sanjeev Kumar sent him a message that at that moment, he was in France and in case the complainant wanted to go to Canada then he could arrange for the same as the person conerned was accompanying Sanjeev Kumar and that he (Sanjeev Kumar) would take responsibility of the amount paid by the complainant. The complainant, however, asked Sanjeev Kumar to speak to complainant's father and Sanjeev Kumar spoke to complainant's father and assured him and undertook all the responsibility upon which the complainant was taken in by his words and agreed for going abroad through Sanjeev Kumar. The complainant sent his documents and on the asking of Sanjeev Kumar deposited an amount of Rs. 1 lac in the account of one Rajan Sood. Another amount of Rs. 20,000/- was deposited in the account of one Sunil Kalia on 13.10.2019. Sanjeev Kumar told the complainant to meet his father Surinderpal at Balachaur and that he would handover all the documents to him. The complainant and his father met Surinderpal who handed over a file to the complainant and told him to go to Delhi on the next day i.e. on 14.10.2019 and passed on a number of one Madam Alisha Aggarwal and asked the complainant to meet her at Connaught Place, Delhi. Accordingly, on 14.10.2019, the complainant and his father met Alisha Aggarwal in Delhi and submitted the documents of the complainant. On 2.11.2019, the complainant received a message from Sanjeev Kumar that the work has been accomplished. It is alleged that later Sanjeev Kumar called the complainant and asked him to arrange for an amount of Rs. 10,80,000/-. When the complainant told Sanjeev Kumar that he will deposit the same in his father Surinderpal's account, Sanjeev Kumar told the complainant to give the amount in cash to his father. Accordingly on 10.11.2019, the complainant, his father and his maternal uncle Satnam Singh and his relative Ashwinder Singh went and gave an amount of Rs. 10,80,000/- in cash to Sanjeev Kumar's father Surinderpal. It is alleged that at that time Alisha Aggarwal was also with him. At that time, the complainant was given a copy of Visa and was told that the remaining amount of Rs. 8 lacs be also given to them. It is alleged that the complainant alongwith his father, maternal uncle Satnam Singh and Ashwinder Singh again met Surinderpal and Alisha Aggarwal on 17.11.2019 and gave an amount of Rs. 8 lacs to them and demanded their passport, upon which Surinderpal assured that the passport will be reaching within 2 hours from Delhi. Although, the complainant waited till evening but he was not given the passport. Later, when the complainant contacted Sanjeev Kumar, he sent a copy of Visa on Whatsapp and e-mail ID of the complainant but the same turned out to be fake. Thereafter, the complainant kept on calling Sanjeev Kumar several times but Sanjeev Kumar used to put off the matter on one pretext or the other and neither gave the passport nor returned the money to him.

(3.) The learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that admittedly the complainant and the petitioner's son were friends but it appears that subsequently on account of some differences amongst them, a false case has been foisted upon Sanjeev Kumar and the petitioner, who is a government servant has also been roped in so as to pressurize the complainant's son and his entire family. It has been submitted that a perusal of the FIR would itself show that the entire allegations of misrepresentation pertaining to procurement of a Visa and pursuant thereto supplying a fake Visa have been levelled against Sanjeev Kumar and that the allegations of entrustment of some amount to the petitioner on the asking of Sanjeev Kumar do not stand substantiated as the entire amount has been stated to have been paid in cash and that no amount was ever credited in the bank account of the petitioner.