ROMESH GUPTA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) ROMESH Gupta, petitioner, has filed the present petition u/s 438, Cr.P.C., for grant of anticipatory bail in case FIR 168 dated 2.12.1998, registered in Police Station, City Hoshiarpur, u/s 406/420 IPC.

(2.) THE FIR was registered on the joint complaint of Gurdip Singh, Amrik Singh, Kulwinder Singh, Harjap Singh, Gurmukh Singh, Kuldeep Ram, Tirath Ram, Santokh Kumar, Hans Raj and Rulda Ram, who wrote to the S.S.P., Hoshiarpur, alleging that M/s Gupta Enterprises, Travel Advisers and Booking Agents, carrying on business at Court Road, Hoshiarpur, had cheated them and after realising Rs. 60,000/- from 31 persons with the promise that the petitioner would arrange to provide job to each of the complainants. However, the firm was not financially sound. No job was given as a result of which, the complainants had to return to India from Dubai. When the proprietor of the firm was confronted as to why he had received the money, he threatened the complainants with dire consequences. Efforts were made to impress upon the petitioner to return the money but of no consequence. The learned Additional District and Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, dismissed the application of the petitioner vide order dated 15.12. 1997 and the reasons of rejection are incorporated in para-5, which reads follows :-

(3.) THE submissions made by the counsel for the petitioner were two fold. Firstly, that the interim directions dated 19.12.1997 have already been granted by Hon'ble Mr. Justice K.S. Kumaran and in pursuance of those directions, the arrest of the petitioner has been stayed. Therefore, it has become a fit case where those directions should be confirmed. On the contrary, it is submitted by the learned AAG that the High Court was not bound to confirm the interim directions. At that stage, the viewpoint of the State was not heard. The allegations against the petitioner are very serious. He has cheated the youth of the country by devouring Rs. 55,000/- to Rs. 60,000/- from each of the aspirants who were given a false promise that they would be given a job in Dubai. The youth had to face frustration as they could not get the job and in this view of the matter the directions dated 19.12.1997 should not be confirmed.