DEVINDER KUAMR SHARMA Vs. STATE OF PUNJAB

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Prayer in this petition is for grant of anticipatory bail to the petitioners in FIR No.53 dated 20.6.2018 under Section 306 IPC, registered at Police Station Mallanwala, District Ferozepur.

(2.) Counsel for the petitioners has stated that as per the allegations in the FIR, registered at the statement made by Darshan Singh @ Sukhminder Singh. Darshan Singh @ Sukhminder Singh is having two sons. His elder son is Gurjant Singh and younger is Harjit Singh and both have studied upto 12th class. Accused persons are doing the business of commission agents and one accused Himmat Kumar Sharma @ Honey was doing the business of sending the people abroad. In 2016, the complainant had sold crop worth Rs.14 Lacs at the shop of petitioner Devinder Kumar Sharma but the petitioner did not gave him the money on the pretext of demonetization and delayed the payment. Later on, Himmat Kumar Sharma @ Honey told the complainant that he can send his son abroad and demanded Rs.30 Lacs. The complainant gave Rs.17 Lacs in three installments, but neither the money was returned nor his son was send abroad. Then, the complainant gave a complaint against them to the police, but they managed to get an FIR registered against the complainant and his son and on that count, his son Gurjant Singh was depressed and disturbed and on account of the constant threats extended by Devinder Kumar Sharma and another, Gurjant Singh consumed poison on 21.5.2018 and he died in the hospital. Later on, the police recovered a suicide note, in which he has named the petitioner as the person who made his life miserable to such an extent that he had no other option but to consume the poison and commit suicide.

(3.) Counsel for the petitioners has further argued that, in fact, FIR No.42 dated 28.3.2018 was registered under Section 420 IPC against complainant-Darshan Singh @ Sukhminder Singh in which it is stated that one Maninder Singh used to sell the crop at his shop and petitioner was known to them and was doing agriculture on 40 acres of land and assured to sell the crop at his shop, demanded Rs.12.5 lacs which was given to him. However, he, later on, refused to sell his crop and never returned the money.