RAM KUMAR GARG Vs. U,T, CHANDIGARH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner has filed this petition under Section 438 Cr.P.C. for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR No.82 dated 11.4.2013 registered at Police Station Sector 3, Chandigarh, for the offence under Section 420 IPC.

(2.) Learned senior counsel for the petitioner contended that the dispute is mainly of civil nature. A suit for recovery of the disputed amount is already pending before the Civil Court. As regards the dishonour of cheque, a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (hereinafter referred to as 'NI Act') is also pending. Learned senior counsel for the petitioner further contended that no cheating is made out. Rather, it is a case of civil nature and the petitioner is not required for any custodial interrogation.

(3.) On the other hand, learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the U.T., Chandigarh and learned senior counsel for the complainant opposed the bail petition. The main contention of the learned senior counsel for the complainant is that intention of the petitioner is to be seen which was dishonest and mala fide from the very beginning as in the agreement, which is Annexure-P.4, Ram Kumar Garg-petitioner has stated himself as sole proprietor of M/s Lakshmi Oil & Soap Mills and had signed the agreement as sole proprietor. He further argued that title deed of plot No.5 has also not been given to the Bank to create mortgage.