In the High Court for the States of Pun jab and Haryana at Chandigarh.
CRM.M 16583 of 2009
Decided on July 08,2009.
Captain Rakesh Rihani -- Petitioner
vs.
State of Punjab --Respondent.
Present: Mr.Sameer Sachdeva, Advocate,for the petitioner
Mr.Ranbir Singh Rawat,A.A.G.Punjab.
Rakesh Kumar Jain, J:
Apprehending his arrest, the petitioner has filed this
application for anticipatory bail in a case registered against him vide FIR
No. 164 dated 06.4.2009 under Section 420 of I.P.C. at Police Station
Kotwali, Patiala.
In short, the allegations against the petitioner are that though
admittedly he is not an Advocate, yet he posed himself to be an Advocate
and induced the complainant to engage him to conduct his case in the
High Court and charged Rs.35,000/-for that purpose.
Before coming to this Court, the petitioner had filed bail
application No.96 of 2009 before the Addl. Sessions Judge, Patiala, which
has been dismissed on 1.6.2009.
Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that the
petitioner had appeared with Mr. Ranjan Lakhanpal Advocate of this Court,
who had filed C.W.P No. 10624 on 16.7.2007 which has been dismissed as
withdrawn on 26.7.2007. It is, thus, contended that no offence is made out
against the petitioner.
On the other hand, learned State Counsel has argued that not
CRM.M 16583 of 2009 -2-
only the petitioner, who is admittedly not an Advocate had posed himself
as an Advocate and took the case of the complainant as well as fee, but also
he had got his name printed on the Vakalatnama filed in the writ petition as
an associate of Mr.Ranjan Lakhanpal Advocate and his name appears in
C.W.P.No.11667 of 2007, as an Advocate, for the complainant therefore,
the act of cheating is writ large on the part of the petitioner.
After hearing the learned counsel for the parties, I am of the
view that the petitioner who is an imposter has induced and cheated
innocent litigants like the petitioner who have no means to ascertain as to
whether a person who is roaming around in Courts in the robes of an
Advocate, is, in fact, an Advocate or not. Since the petitioner was
introduced by his co-accused P.S.Kahlon as an Advocate of the High Court,
the complainant had believed him and had handed over his case and
amount of Rs.35,000/-. Thus, apparently, the petitioner is working as a tout
in the District Courts and is a great threat to this pious and noble
profession.
In view of the seriousness of the offence, I do not find any extra
ordinary circumstance to grant the petitioner anticipatory bail. Hence, the
bail application is hereby dismissed.
July 08,2009 (Rakesh Kumar Jain) RR Judge