SAHIL JAIN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) PRAYER in this petition, filed under Section 438, Cr.P.C., is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners, namely, Sahil Jain, son of Rakesh Jain; Rakesh Jain, son of Sushil Kumar; and Ankur Jain, son of Rakesh Jain, all residents of House No. 561, Sector 10-D, Chandigarh, who have been booked for having committed the offence punishable under Section 406, IPC, in a case arising out of FIR No. 193, dated 24.9.2012, registered at Police Station, Sector 3, Chandigarh.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that on the complaint of Inderjit Verma of M/s Jewellers Emm Sons, SCO No. 96, 2nd Floor, and diamond ornaments from him. As per the demand, the petitioners used to take gold/diamond ornaments from the complainant on credit basis and subject to liking/approval of their customers, the petitioners retained the jewelry and returned the remaining ornaments to the complainant. The petitioners were dealing with the complainant for the last 5-6 years. The payment regarding the due bills was not in dispute.

(3.) LEARNED senior counsel for the petitioners submits that the petitioners have joined the investigation more than six times, but nothing against them has emerged on the file. He further submits that a case of business transaction has been given a colour of criminal case. He further submits that even if the contents of the FIR are taken at its face value then also the mischief of Section 406, IPC, is not attracted for the prosecution of the petitioners.